A friend who's been deeply involved in the King Ukraine County manual "recount" e-mails:
When the hand count was complete at the Tukwila facility, it was my understanding from talking to the floor managers, that Rossi was still in the lead. At that point the canvas board still had several hundred ballots to review but now they knew how many votes to come up with to give Gregoire a victory. It seems they did just that by assigning overvotes to Gregoire.After discovering Precinct 1823 and hearing the Elections Department's "What Me Worry?" response to it all, I'm wondering whether this is simply incompetence or bona fide criminal negligence. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 22, 2004 08:37 PM | Email This
Initially we were tallying clearly marked overvotes as overvotes and putting them back in the box with the rest of the ballots when we had completed counting a precinct. That changed about half-way through the count of absentee ballots when the canvas board ordered that all overvotes, no matter how clearly marked, be sent to the board for review. There have been reports that the board's criteria - or at least the criteria used by two members of the board - also changed in regard to the overvotes at that time and more were divined to be real votes, and mostly for Gregoire. The infamous "Christine Rossi" decision was one example of many illustrating the nonsense going on with the canvas board when that overvote was decreed to be a valid vote for Gregoire.
The other sequence of events that raised questions involved our initial counts and the subsequent search for ballots to recycle. When this process started we first sorted ballots from the polling places into precincts. Then it took just two days to count the some 300,000 ballots from the polls. The observers from both parties watched the data entry process and knew, by the end of the poll ballot count, that the hand count in King County was not going to change the outcome of the governor's race unless something else was done. As we began counting the absentee ballots, it was obvious that the Democrat's counters had new directions and they were noticeably more aggressive in sending ballots to the canvas board. At the same time, someone in the Elections Department obviously initiated a search for ballots that could be recycled. Perhaps the timing was a coincidence but I doubt it. That led to the "discovery" of the 700 - plus ballots that the state supreme court allowed in with this Wednesday's decision.
In the last few days of the operation, we were counting the poll ballots again for the second and, in some cases, third and fourth times. The boxes of the "poll" ballots that came to my table all had absentee ballots mixed in with them, which was not suppose to happen. On one hand, having seen what passes for inventory control at the Elections Department, I was not surprised that this, too, was a mess. Yet it also does away with one of the audit trails and provides an excuse as to why the count in any particular precinct may differ from the original. By chance I happened to get my own precinct poll votes to count. I had been a poll watcher on the original election day, and had recorded the poll vote from the tape that ran when the poll was closed. There was a significant difference between what was reported the evening of November 2 for my precinct and what was in that precinct's box on December 19, when I counted the ballots. Gregoire's votes had gone up and Rossi's had gone down. It was obvious that absentee ballots were mixed in with the poll ballots, so changes could be expected, but it raises the question of whether or not those Rossi poll votes are now in the box of absentee ballots for that precinct or "misplaced" in some closet in a warehouse somewhere.
I personally have no doubt that the two Democrats on the canvas board made a conscious effort to fix the election in Gregoire's favor. I am also certain they were aided, perhaps unwittingly, in that effort by the incompetence of the top managers within the Elections Department.
After all, the Democratic Party is really not a party at all but a criminal enterprise, like the South American drug cartels. They're parasites, cheats and liars.
Let's sue their asses off, Mr. Vance. Your Washington State Republican web site is way too conciliatory. You're dealing with thugs, Vance!
Posted by: FedUpWithThis on December 22, 2004 08:49 PMMy check is in the mail! GO, FIGHT, WIN!
Posted by: Scott on December 22, 2004 08:54 PMArticle IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states that the U.S. shall guarantee each state a “republican” (no pun intended) form of government. In Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 1 (1849), the U.S. Supreme Court said that the U.S. Congress had the power to determine whether a particular state government was legitimate, and that no court had the power to overturn such a decision by the U.S. Congress. This power was actually exercised several times in the 1860’s and 1870’s against southern states who had denied citizens the right to vote, or where elections had been won by fraud.
Not only does Congress have this ultimate power under the U.S. Constitution, but it would be especially appropriate, given the fact that thousands of military personnel from this state have been denied the right to vote due to county election officials mailing them absentee ballots late. If it was okay for Clinton to declare Haiti’s or Yugoslavia’s government illegitimate due to fraudulent elections (and use military force to enforce his decisions), then certainly it is appropriate for the U.S. Congress to use its express power to do so under the U.S. Constitution.
The Democrats have been bragging that the Washington Constitution gives the state legislature (currently controlled by their party in both houses) the power to decide contested elections at the state level. Therefore, they could hardly complain if the GOP controlled U.S. Congress decided this matter at the federal level, using the federal constitutional provision.
Posted by: Richard Pope on December 22, 2004 08:55 PMMilitary voters didn't get their legally requested ballots in time, so their votes don't get counted.
Then more and more ballots are "found," ballots are "enhanced" and then King County repeatedly changes their methods for hand-counting in ways which ALWAYS benefit the Democratic candidate.
Then, after everyone else has counted, they magically produce a Greogoire win through an utterly lopsided and statistically unbelievable
reversal of previous numbers.
This is NOT incompetence. And the Democrats think they'll get away with this because the Washington media is worth than Dan Rather when it comes to partisan one-sided dishonesty. Let's see if they're right. Thank god nothing more is at stake here than Washington's crappy sullied governorship.
Posted by: David on December 22, 2004 09:08 PMI truly believe that the King County canvasing board queered this election, but I want some real evidence, not just conjecture.
Posted by: Darrell on December 22, 2004 09:34 PMIt should be 100% transparent and available for everyone to see on the web.
Who is this guy and what does he have to say?
Posted by: scott on December 22, 2004 09:46 PMI'm going to donate money and time until Christine Gregoire is brought down.
This was simply not a fair contest.
Get an affidavit. Don't embarass your stupid ass any further.
Posted by: Christine G on December 22, 2004 10:05 PMof course, the Democrat party will object to fair and legal voting practices, but a great campaign could be run using the fraud from this election...
I believe that many Democrats will vote for election reform, but they all know in their hearts what happened here...
of course, the C.G's of the world and the Dustins's of the world don't believe in fair elections, and they would deny the military their vote, so the hell with them....
With all those Republicans around, watching and participating in the recount, there should be no need to rely on rumor and supposition.
Where's the evidence to show that the Democrats committed fraud? Sure, they had motive and opportunity, but where's the evidence?
The "barking moonbats" and "lunatic wing of the Democratic Party" were justly criticized for engaging in "fever swamp" rumor and conspiracy mongering.
Don't be like them.
Posted by: Micajah on December 22, 2004 10:19 PMAnd x-tine simply sued her way to this win, didn't play by the rules in place. FIght on, Dino! Most Washingtonians don't like the smell of this one! When it's this corrupt, it must be fought
Posted by: Michele on December 22, 2004 10:20 PMI was Republican counting observer for 6 days on the second shift. I spent most of those 6 days watching 1 of 2 dual-entry data terminals, where every tally slip for the 80 counting tables (40 on Saturday and Sunday) was input.
The data entry operators were very good and VERY fast. The quality of the tally slips 4 each precinct and getting numbers to match was considerably less so.
There were different items we tried to keep track of on different days. Last Saturday I watched maybe 175 or so tally slips being entered (not an exact count). Out of those 175 tally slips there were 12-to-14 where something did not add up:
Either the spreadsheet auto total check (yes: A SPREADSHEET (I won't go there tonight)) caught an error on the tally slip; or the wrong precinct name or number was written on the slip; or in a couple cases we got a second tally slip for the same precinct when it had already been entered and the 1st and 2nd numbers were different; or (on maybe 4-5 percent) the numbers were so small and poorly written that the data entry operators and we the observers got eye strain trying to figure them out. I gave up on complaining about the illegible handwriting.
Most of the above problems were caught right out of the tally slip inbox by the data entry people. We the observers caught a few more. In theory all the discrepancies were investigated and explained (no: I did not hear all those explanations: I was just a flunky at this job).
Last Sunday was perhaps the most interesting day:
I did nothing all afternoon except try and keep track of 3 things at the data entry terminal; for what was ALMOST entirely second and third recounts of the same precincts. In this case I counted (at least as well as I could remember (3 things is about my limit)):
(1) How many tally slips were entered.
(2) How many precincts had ANY number change from 1st to 2nd manual recount.
(3) For the precincts that DID have numbers change from 1st to 2nd count, what was net gain or loss at end of day for Dino Rossi.
Here are the numbers I ended up with at the end of the day. Call them plus or minus 2 or 3
(no calculators, cell phone use, or electronic devices on the counting floor):
(1) 2nd and 3rd count tally slips entered: 168
(2) Precincts that changed between counts: 78
(3) Net gain for Dino on 2nd-3rd counts: +9
SIDEBAR: Leading reason for counts not adding up is because they STILL had not recovered from starting to count a couple weeks ago WITHOUT having the ballots correctly sorted by precinct. This caused no end of messy confustion, with mis-placed ballots flying all over the place carried by runners and supervisors (ONE person), looking for their correct "home box".
IOW: The Ukrainian Times reporter who served as actual COUNTER for a day and wrote that piece about how the manual count was meticulous and spot-on accurate: He was all wet on the big picture.
Maybe his table did well (and some of the tables did appear to do an excellent and careful job), but as one of just a few people who watched nearly ALL the tally slips go in for 6 afternoon shifts, I can categorically state that was NOT universally true: Not even close. A few of the people counting should NOT have been let anywhere NEAR a counting table, IMO.
Miscellaneous footnotes:
The percentage and absolute number of ballots that were sent to canvass went up TREMENDOUSLY between my 1st 3 days (2 weekends ago) and last weekend. Guess why (already covered by other posts).
Largest precint entered: 1420 votes.
Smallest precinct: ONE vote.
Most exciting moment:
One of the Elections employees at one of the counting tables comes wandering over to the data entry area with a loose ballot in her hand to complain about something... ALL BY HERSELF.
A BIG no-no. We the observers siced supervisors and floor managers on her. They sent her back to her table.
I stand by my summary to the gang at the office:
Messy. Very messy.
Ken
Okanogan County Republican Party Ex Com;
who still does IT for "a large Government agency"
(Don't go there. Thank you.)
See you on here often, you never have any new ideas, only old recycled trash peppered with condescension, and a sprinkle of invective.
"Don't embarass your stupid ass any further." Hah! That's truly irony, since you don't see that it's happening to you.
You think there weren't witnesses to everything? The GOP lawyers and representatives of candidates were there to observe it all. The only reason there haven't been massive affadavits and lawsuits already is that ROSSI WON THE ELECTION! They couldn't sue unless Rossi had been harmed.
Now that Rossi has been harmed by the fraud and blatant mistakes of the King County Elections Commission, your wish will be granted! They will get affadavits!
Your ignorance or your nervousness is truly showing, Christine G. Maybe both!
Posted by: Larry on December 22, 2004 10:40 PM(1) 2nd and 3rd count tally slips entered: 168
(2) Precincts that changed between counts: 78
(3) Net gain for Dino on 2nd-3rd counts: +29
TWENTY-NINE on last, not NINE... I think.
Like I said: Plus or minus 2 or 3.
I remembered the numbers VERY well when I turned them over to the floor managers at the end of the day last Sunday, but (stupidly) did not make myself a hand-written copy because I was in a hurry to catch the ferry. Since then our .NET project has had total focus, so my old neurons faded pretty fast.
Ken
If the Republicans are going to have affidavits, great. I have no problem with legitimate, sworn evidence being presented to proper authorities.
Ergo, my "nervousness" is not showing.
When someone posts hearsay nonsense like the top "story" here, the author is embarrassing his stupid ass. Sorry. It's the truth.
Hi Michele -
I missed the spanking. I caught a wiff of hot air from Larry, who is over his head. Did you wanna give it a try, sweetie?
Posted by: Christine G on December 22, 2004 11:07 PMWe all need a good laugh now and then.
Posted by: Kevin S on December 22, 2004 11:16 PMI'm glad you have no problem with legitimate, sworn evidence. I hope that the person who wrote the top "story" is called to testify. He's my uncle, and he'll be the best d@mned witness you, the Democrats, the State, and most importantly, the GOP has ever seen. Weren't expecting THAT, now were you?
In over my head? Kiss my ass. I was also a poll-watcher and an observer. Where were you on election day? Were you a pollwatcher? A poll observer? Did you observe or help watch the either of the recounts?
You wouldn't know your shit from apple butter. I was there. Were you? Or are YOU taking someone else's word for it?
Been skiping over your posts for days now. Finally need to respond to your trolling.
For the record, I was there too. Observer. Don't comment if you don't know what was going on in Tukwila.
I'm waiting. We're waiting.
Did you volunteer, observe, count, or re-count at this election? Did you witness anything? Or are YOU the one spouting hearsay?
Posted by: Larry on December 22, 2004 11:36 PMWell, it would have to be.
Posted by: Larry on December 22, 2004 11:38 PMThis entire election process has been just so wrong. So blatantly illegal. I hope the Repubs do contest the election so some of the Dems long standing fraud tactics are exposed once and for all!
Posted by: Deborah on December 22, 2004 11:53 PMHe won the regular count, per the law.
He won the machine recount, per the law.
He lost the hand recount, per the law.
In the first two cases, he said the race is over, Chris should concede. His supporters said he would never keep going if the votes did not go his way.
When the votes did not go his way with the hand recount, he not only did not concede like he said Chris should have (strike one), he also started calling this too close to call after chastising Chris many times for the same exact thing (strike two) and then he started the lawsuits and getting disenfranchised voters who are republican to do exactly what he said the democrats were wrong to do (strike three).
He will do anything, say anything, change his views as well as demonize his opponents -- then turn around and do exactly the same thing.
This makes him a REALLY scary potential governor. Right or wrong does not matter with Rossi. Certainly consistency does not matter with Rossi. All he cares about is WINNING at all costs...regardless of the law and the process. And regardless of what he says he stands for (clearly that does not matter). You can not believe anything the guy has said ... during the campaign or after Nov. 2nd.
I shudder when I think we might end up with a governor like this running Washington state.
Here is a man with no integrity (see the three strikes above), no consistency and you can not beleive a single thing the guy says (see all comments after the race...now that the shoe is on the other foot, he changes 100%).
If the US supreme court ends up appointing him, despite fewer votes, we will have a lying, cheating governor from day one. This would be an embarrasment to our state and our people. Thank goodness the truth came out so we know all about him.
Posted by: joe on December 23, 2004 01:53 AMOf course, there also remains the fact that the other 38 or so counties have just been given new rules to follow for recanvassing ballots (per the SC ruling yesterday) - so the counting may yet continue elsewhere. Or do only KingCo voters get equal protection under the law?
Posted by: Patrick on December 23, 2004 05:54 AMRUN, RUN, RUN from those who say there's nothing wrong with the process, that those who worry are paranoid, that the count will be honest.
Pay no attention to the trolls. Don't even respond.
Posted by: South County on December 23, 2004 06:06 AMI hope you guys get the governor you elected. The rest of the country is watching this ridiculous charade.
I'm sure if it goes to Federal court, they'll use the decision in 2000 for Florida that they can't just recount the counties they feel like.
I predict pretty soon the Left will say our voting is so flawed that voting itself is unconstitutional, and the only way to protect our rights is for them to just appoint leaders.
PlutosDad
http://eyesontheball.blogspot.com
News Satire that's right for you
You said:
"of course, the C.G's of the world and the Dustins's of the world don't believe in fair elections, and they would deny the military their vote, so the hell with them....
I believe in a fair election, and I would not deny the military the right to their vote.
A) This election is frought with irregularities. So was Bush v Gore. There was no re-vote in Florida, there will be no re-vote here. I had to live with that decision that I didn't like, and my life continued.
B) The military has every right to vote just like you and me. However, I'm not in favor of granting them special rights to get their ballots in. The law says that all ballots that would be tabulated for consideration must be received by the date of the original county certification. That includes all ballots postmarked on the election day, but delivered 5 days after the election, and military votes and votes from expatriots living out of the U.S. I am not for granting special rights for military personnel, that their votes can be counted well into June of next year as long as it has the date of November 2nd, 2004 on the signature line, because there is no postmark on the ballot on military mail, ever. The soldiers simply write "FREE" on the place for the postage, and it is mailed.
If we were to extend this deadline, there is zero 3rd party verification that it really was mailed by November 2nd. I'd like to see the absentee ballots required on or by November 2nd, not just postmarked by or on that date.
In a page from the Republican playbook, I support equal rights for the military, not special rights. All military votes cast and received by the original (first) certification date should be counted and tallied.
The difference between ballots that were received after the first certification date, and the ones that were part of this second class of votes, is the fact that they were received by the original date, and they have a chain of command on them. The Justices even noted in their ruling that there is no proof of anything to the contrary when it comes to their security.
I do not believe the 22 ballots found in the side pocket of the voting machine should be counted, since there is no chain of command, no proof of security.
I predict that numerous Demoncrats will be indicted, convicted and spend from 1 to 10 years in prison. It usually takes anywhere from 24 to 36 months to investigate, try, convict and sentence. Some of the participants will most likely be observing the 2008 election from their prison cells.
That does not help honest Washington voters now, but history will obliterate the thugs shilling for Christine "Rossi" Gregorie.
Posted by: leaddog2 on December 23, 2004 08:26 AM"because there is no postmark on the ballot on military mail, ever"
I need to clarify that statement to:
"because there is no outgoing postmark on the ballot on military mail from overseas, ever"
This information told to me by some of my military buddies, and confirmed by an army soldier who voted for Rossi calling in to the John Carlson show last night.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 23, 2004 08:28 AMHow can she seriously approach the subject of a Rossi concession - as she has done today on the news?
Gregoire has not asked Dino to concede, quite the opposite, she said in that news conference last night that she will not do anything of the sort until all the votes are counted in King County and then, "we will know who the next Governor of Washington truly is."
Unlike Dino, she has class enough to know that the race isn't over until Dixie Lee Ray sings and all the votes are cast.
Please stop with your outright lies.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 23, 2004 08:32 AMHow can she seriously approach the subject of a Rossi concession - as she has done today on the news?
Gregoire has not asked Dino to concede, quite the opposite, she said in that news conference last night that she will not do anything of the sort until all the votes are counted in King County and then, "we will know who the next Governor of Washington truly is."
Unlike Dino, she has class enough to know that the race isn't over until Dixie Lee Ray sings and all the votes are counted.
Please stop with your outright lies.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 23, 2004 08:32 AM"Wouldn't know shit from apple butter" - you guys in the sticks have the cutest expressions.
I'm very impressed that your uncle was a poll watcher. That raises your credibility and esteem in my eyes immensely. Wow.
So, I'll just be following all your posts, knowing that you have the inside track on all the doings in KC, while I sit back and eat an apple butter sandwich (sounds sort of good, doesn't it?)
Unlike you I have no inside knowledge. Since I have this little thing called a job, I don't have time to be a poll watcher. What do all these people down in Tukwila with all the inside knowledge usually do with their time - no doubt they are all nuclear scientists and corporate presidents - the sort of people that I have such faith in that I will take a second hand account from a facelesss internet poster as the few scraps of truth I can find in this sea of corporate media bias. Thank God for you, Larry.
Posted by: Christine G on December 23, 2004 09:10 AMDustin, you are full of it. She opened her mouth on election night and gave her victory speach before all the precincts reported, and before Rossi made any concession. Remember??? And Berendt called for a Rossi concession yesterday BEFORE King county even officially reported. Classy isn't even close. You need to stop the outright lies, or turn on a TV before you spew them.
Posted by: Chris on December 23, 2004 09:14 AMWell, this is one former Marine who's going to have to call Bull$h1t on that.
I WATCHED the post office official (also a former Devil Dog) place the OUTGOING postmark on my ballot. If you would like, I can have any number of US Air Force Officers testify to this.
So you're not for granting some leniency to the Washingtonians on the ground in Iraq, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, and any number of other countries - to include those on float in international waters - who EVERY DAY OF THEIR LIVES WAKE UP FAR FROM HOME WITH A UNIFORM AND A RIFLE, READY TO PUT LIFE AND LIMB ON THE LINE SO YOU CAN HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE, MANY OF WHOM SPEND EVERY WAKING AND SLUMBERING MOMENT IN IMMEDIATE DANGER, WHO WORRY MORE ABOUT CATCHING A ROUND OR AN RPG OR AN IED,
but to people who live in King County and had their ballots mailed to them in King County and the requests to verify their signatures mailed to them in King County that's all right?
Two words, buddy, and it ain't good job.
It doesn't matter if you agree with YOUR ELECTED OFFICIAL OR THEIR POLICIES. The men and women of the United States Armed Forces are American citizens in the truest sense of the word. To deny them the most fundamental of rights in our Federal Republic is unthinkable.
Unthinkable. Intolerable. Criminalistic.
I'm going to stop now before I go back to my Sergeant roots and show you why Marine Corps Basic Training is among the most respected military institutions in the world.
I'm not going to get into the postmark issue, except to say that my army buddies and callers on talk shows differ from your account.
To accomodate your point, I'll recant my statement, and say that instead:
"because there is no outgoing postmark on at least some of the ballots on military mail from overseas"
You're asking for your voting rights to be somehow fundamentally different than mine, and that no matter when the vote is received (is 2007 ok for you?), it should be counted.
I disagree, while I believe that the armed forces deserves to have considerations appropriated for them, similarly to what we do for the disabled in voting, there has to be SOME sort of cutoff, and that was on November 17th, the day of the first certification.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 23, 2004 09:52 AMGood idea, since the company I work for on this contract runs the post office. Your "army buddies", what billets do they hold? It is quite likely that in the forward collection points it is not postmarked, but after FL in 2000 the Pentagon laid out some ground rules about postmarking - namely, that it will occur. In fact, this year the Pentagon took unprecendented steps to ensure that the voice of the American fighting man was heard.
"You're asking for your voting rights to be somehow fundamentally different than mine, and that no matter when the vote is received (is 2007 ok for you?), it should be counted."
No, you pompous overly educated liberal hypocrite, I am asking you to understand the simple fact that mail is not a Priority 1 item when classifying cargo for sorties. That sort of classification is reserved for such "unimportant" items as ammunition and rations. For that reason, it is often physically impossible to get ballots to Forward Operating Bases on time due to their late issue - unless you and your democratic ilk don't mind running convoy ops from Talil Air Base or Baghdad International.
Any more stupid comments, Mr. Astigmatism? News flash - I've got it too, and that didn't stop me from pinning on the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor.
Posted by: Aaron on December 23, 2004 10:21 AMOne is an electronic systems maintenance engineer, and the other is an MP, both in the army.
Your own statement ("It is quite likely that in the forward collection points it is not postmarked") supports my earlier statement, that without instituting one final date, in this case November 17th, 2004, then there could be endless ballots flowing in from the military and no one would really know if they were signed on the 2nd of November or previous.
I do understand that mail is not a Priority 1 item in war. Obviously, you understand that as well.
Elections ballots should be ahead of regular mail, and be Priority 1.5. If it's not, then we to make it so.
But again, there *HAS* to be some sort of cutoff time. November 17th was it. How many absentee votes that were postmarked in the U.S. weren't counted because the post office dragged their feet? Probably quite a few. How many expatriates also got their absentee ballot not counted because the mail was late? Probably quite a few as well.
I'm sorry that some military ballots didn't make it on time, just as I'm sorry that some absentee ballots didn't make it on time, and I'm sorry some expatriate ballots did not make it on time.
The bottom line: It's all about the deadline.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 23, 2004 11:49 AM"If it's not, then we to make it so."
should be
"If it's not, then we need to make it so."
Posted by: DustinJames on December 23, 2004 11:50 AMYou’re hearsay; ignorance and liberal attitude disgrace each and every military person that has given the ultimate sacrifice so that YOU and Christine G. may spew your views. I’m sure you have never ever sacrificed a day of your life to defend your rights; yet you are so quick to deny the rights of those that do so on your behalf. Come on, basing your views on people calling into the “John Carlson” show? Do you know these people personally?
Why isn’t your question, “Why didn’t military ballots get mailed by King County and others in time for your (yes your) military personnel to participate?” King County knows that a person is military by there address. Deployed military personnel should be given every consideration to participate even if special circumstances are required; such as mailing ballots early. And, if an election is going to be decided by one vote then yes it should count up to the day of state certification. Just an example: How bout those guys on patrol on the Tridents that may or may not receive mail in time to vote on those 58 – 72 day patrols? I know I missed a few elections. Or, the guy on the fast attack submarine that may or may not receive mail for an even longer period of time?
In my younger days I was quite the liberal Democrat. I ask you; why is it that many military men and women when they go into the service of their country and have liberal leanings change their views and either become a Republican or Independent (as am I)? I will tell you one reason, disenfranchisement mean anything to you guys?
As for changing the election process, I’m all for it. Let’s make it based on our federal electoral process that our brilliant forefathers had the foresight to implement. Let us have the same system but instead of electoral votes by state let’s let each county have a vote or two. Just as it is not right for a few states with large populations to decide the fate of our country, the same applies to our state. A few counties should not determine the fate of the entire state.
Sorry, I will stop rambling. This is my first post in this type of forum and most likely my last as I try to be a humble law abiding under educated citizen. But, when people begin whining and spewing about how every vote should count there always seems to be caveats. Let’s make EVERY vote count.
Again, sorry for taking your time and perhaps not explaining myself in a clear and concise way.
More taxation and less business friendly environment. Hope the Republicans can root out the weasels in time to turn this joke around. Sure would like a new election.
One good thing, I'm fairly convinced that Washington State is or will lose it's blue state status because of Gregoire and the
State's Dumpstercratic Party.
Our all-volunteer bunch of mercenary killers, while being hands-down the best butchers on the planet, are doing nothing to protect us. If anything, they are putting "us" in harms way by following the shrub in his mad quests. We make ten enemies for every one we kill, and we go broke doing it.
And let's forget the idea Rossi would be any better than Chrissi. Another pair of hanging vs lethal injection choices. We're screwed either way, or at least somebody is. The only difference would be in which special interest gets the goldmine and which the shaft.
Posted by: Third Party Voter on December 24, 2004 01:03 PM