December 31, 2004
Total Meltdown in King County Voter List

It was last reported that there were 3,539 more ballots counted in King County than voters who cast them. The discrepancy is actually much larger.

The 3,539 is only the net. This comes from having roughly 1,500 more voters than counted ballots in some precincts, and about 5,000 more ballots than known voters in other precincts.

[This picks up where I left off in the post below about Precinct 3301. I can find only 41 precinct changes among counted voters in the Dec. 29 file since the Nov. 1 file and these appear to be provisional voters who corrected their precincts at the polls. Conclusion: in certain precincts there are about 1,500 more known voters who cast ballots that were accepted than there are ballots that were counted in the manual recount].

Bob Williams of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation brought to my attention several sections of the WAC that govern the canvassing boards. As I read the WACs, the King County canvassing board should not have certified its election without getting the count of voters to reconcile with the count of ballots, and that is something that they obviously have not done.

Among these: WAC 434-262-040

Verification of auditor's abstract of votes. The county canvassing board shall examine the auditor's abstract of votes and shall verify that all of the individual precinct and absentee ballot totals have been included in the abstract and that the subtotals and county-wide totals for registered voters and votes cast are an accurate reflection of the sum of those individual precinct and absentee ballot totals.
[See the other sections in chapter 434-262 for related rules].

I suspect that the canvassing board simply checked the total number of registered voters on the rolls and not the number of voters who cast ballots. But that would be terribly lame if that's all they think they're required to do.

In any case, I would be very surprised if King County will be able to account for both 1,500 ballotless voters and 5,000 voterless ballots. The few explanations that have been offered, confidential voters and military voters, only account for about 100 and at most 200 voterless ballots respectively.

UPDATE (Jan. 3): See the latest revelations of King County Elections phoney-baloney "Enron Math", here

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 31, 2004 02:50 PM | Email This
Comments
1. You mean we should count the same number of ballots as voters? I didn't realize that. But wouldn't that, like, make it harder to cheat?

Posted by: Marc on December 31, 2004 03:04 PM
2. These King County elections people have a lot of explaining to do....REVOTE!!!!

Posted by: Michele on December 31, 2004 03:10 PM
3. Attaboy Stefan--
Wouldn't failure to reconcile the total votes counted to total voters credited for voting be
"neglect, error or wrongful act"?
This is a huge part of the jigsaw puzzle. If little Jefferson Co. with 2 election workers can do it before each & every count is certified, why can't King Co??? Lack of leadership by Reed and systemic incompetence in KingCo.
Reed really ought to dig into King County now that the manual recount is certified. Nothing is stopping him. Gregoire is Governor-elect. Why don't we start calling Sam Reed and ask?

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on December 31, 2004 03:24 PM
4. Do "votes cast" and "ballot totals" have different meanings? Hopefully, a "vote cast" can be interpreted to mean a person actually casting a vote, as opposed to meaning one of the many pieces of paper that are counted as ballots in the end.

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 31, 2004 03:28 PM
5. Stefan, you're just being too impatient. The "cookies" aren't done yet.

Posted by: Micajah on December 31, 2004 03:34 PM
6. Keep up the good work, stefen. We are counting on you!

So, let's say, fraudoire is sworn in on Jan 12. then what??? Is it possible for an election challenge to stop the grand innauguration of the false one before then? Seems to me once she takes office, it's factually over?? Ever try to pry an NRA member's cold dead fingers off his/her firearm?? I know christine's fingers on the Governor's desk will be even stronger.


fRed in kingcounty
who wants to cast another ballot in another election of the governor

Posted by: fRed on December 31, 2004 03:37 PM
7. Someone could file suit with the state supreme court right away under RCW 29A.68.011(5) as an "other" neglect of duty on the part of an election official. The allegation would be the King County has a duty to reconcile these, and that these totals are apparently out of kilter.

It would not be filed as an election contest (since the legislature does not certify until on or after 01/10/2005 -- if at all), but simply as a petition for King County to review this matter and file a proper report. Also to freeze the certification process until King County has done so.

The justices could kick this one to the legislature, and say that body has to judge election contests under Article III, Section 4. On the other hand, if the discrepancies look to be darned obvious, they may be very afraid to cavalierly dismiss the petition. After all, they have to get elected, and they can't afford to be perceived as hypocrites.

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 31, 2004 03:41 PM
8. I have been following this "fiasco" with intense interest and absolute amazement since the beginning. Thanks to Stefan many people in your state know the "election" of CG was the epitome of fraud and in the days to come, many more will also realize this fact.

Keep up the good work Shark, many eyes throughout our great country are watching and pulling for you and your brethen.

Posted by: Chuck on December 31, 2004 03:44 PM
9. Another election will not happen simply because there will not be a re-vote for President of the United States. mr. bush does not want to take the chance so the Republican Party will not ask for a Re-vote. They know full well that it will spread to include calls for a national re-vote.

Posted by: Magnum Serpentine on December 31, 2004 03:55 PM
10. I'm going to have a very good time at a New Year's party tonight casually dropping some of these bombs on my Democrat friends.

And Sam Reed, WOW, dead asleep at the wheel causing this massive pileup. Isn't his office supposed to check for basic errors like this? How the heck are they off by thousands? Scary! And this is happening in the USA!

Posted by: Jeff B. on December 31, 2004 03:59 PM
11. bwwahahaha, you RepuGNICON dolts! have a happy new year dreaming(or nightmaring) about Gov ELect Gregoire!!!

Posted by: Manco_Dollars on December 31, 2004 04:01 PM
12. Magnum,

Wow, you are pretty ignorant. Hello! The Presidential Election is not being contested. It was not even close.

Posted by: Jeff B. on December 31, 2004 04:02 PM
13. This smacks of the aged playbook the Democrats used to get LBJ into office. Read: The mystery of ballot box 13 in Texas.

But I, for one, am not surprised: When I learned that after two recounts favoring the Republican candidate there came the discovery of enough votes to assure the Democrats a win I suspected nasty.

Now what remains is this: Will there be enough of an uproar in the blogosphere to get the MSM to report on the goings-on? I don't honestly know, so the time has come to demand the MSM report on this.

Posted by: James C. Hess on December 31, 2004 04:33 PM
14. Manco, laugh while you can. Your governor will have no effect on the majority of the US, only your state.

At the rate the Democrats are becoming extinct, just another election cycle or two, and there won't be enough Democratic governors, senators, and representatives for a good volleyball game.

Look around, you are in the minority party for many years to come, and this is assuming the party even continues to exist.

Posted by: Chuck on December 31, 2004 04:38 PM
15. To Michele who said "These King County elections people have a lot of explaining to do....REVOTE!!!!"

I agree that the current results can't stand but, based on the available information, I disagree with the remedy. I say demand that the manual recount totals be thrown out, if that's legally possible, & to do a recount based on the actual amounts of legitimate ballots. Since Ukraine Cty. slants hard left & considering that their net votes gained would eliminate Gregoire's margin of victory, I say do a legitimate recount & get Mr. Rossi certified as the legitimate winner, sans revote.

Posted by: Gary Gross on December 31, 2004 04:50 PM
16. Shark,
Stop posting your analysis! King County has alread qualified this information as "Preliminary". That means that they are "retouching" things as we speak. The more you disclose about their incompetence, the easier it is for them to "fix" the problems. My advice is to let them distribute their final version, then start pounding away at it's errors.

Yes, we are all desprerate for information but it is best to hold off for a little to allow them to give themselves the rope that we will hang them on.

Posted by: Eric on December 31, 2004 04:57 PM
17. FYI - I just was emailed the below regarding a re-vote petition from a friend of Dino's. Please sign and forward the petition asap if it is something you support, and forward the link on to others who might be interested. Note that it is very time sensitive.

Here's to a new, legitimate election in the new year - cheers!

-------------------------------------------------

As you know, there are literally hundreds of questions regarding the recent election for the next Governor of Washington. The Rossi campaign and the Washington State Republican Party are working very hard to investigate many of these questions.

Yet, there is almost no way to resolve many of the questions to the point that the people of Washington will feel confident that who is determined the winner actually received the most amount of legal votes. On top of these questions, there are the many Washington residents who are proudly serving in our military who were never given the opportunity to vote in this election.

Until just a few days ago, even the Democrats were stating that there were many questions regarding this elections.

Many in this state can not accept a result that is under such a cloud of illegitimacy. We can not have our executive branch of our government be crippled by such problems.

There is only one answer -- a re-vote.

There has been a website set up to have people learn more about a re-vote -- www.revotewa.com

At this website, people can sign a petition to the legislature asking them to call for a re-vote.

Please take the time to sign the petition yourself and to pass information regarding this website to as many Washington residents as possible. We have a short amount of time to show the legislature that the people of Washington are demanding a re-vote.

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT! Please take the time to pass this information along as soon as possible. Also, encourage your friends to send it to their friends.

Go to www.revotewa.com

Click on: Revote: Petition

Click on: "Click Here to Sign Petition" at the bottom of the page

Fill out the petition and click: Submit

Posted by: LoneWolf on December 31, 2004 05:00 PM
18. Eric,

You make a very good point.

I've uncovered an awful lot of incriminating details that I'm NOT publishing for precisely that reason.

At this point, to correct the discrepancies in the precinct counts, the county would have to fix 6,500 voter records. The new file is going to be reconciled against the existing file and they would have to justify each and every correction. I'm accusing these people of massive incompetence, not a tightly organized conspiracy. I don't think we'll see these 6,500 records changed in such a way that both fixes the alleged problems and also not introducing new detectable problems.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 31, 2004 05:18 PM
19. Stefan, you've got'em cornered!

Do you know what one of my kids said today at lunch? It went something like this:

"Those Democrats, they dig holes for others to fall in, but they themselves fall into it."

Posted by: TADD on December 31, 2004 05:25 PM
20. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 31, 2004 05:18 PM

They could conceivably reduce or eliminate the 5,051 voterless ballots in several ways: (1) they have may legitimately missed names in compiling the list, (2) there may be 100 or 200 people in the Address Confidentiality Program who voted, (3) there may be 100 or 200 federal write-in ballots cast by military and overseas voters who were not previously registered, or (4) they can just fraudulently add names as needed to the computerized list of "actual" voters.

But the 1,512 ballotless voters is a much more difficult problem. They simply can't make another 1,512 ballots appear, in addition to those that have already been counted.

And depending upon which precincts new names are "discovered" of "actual voters", it could cause the creation of additional ballotless voters, instead of the reduction of voterless ballots.

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 31, 2004 05:35 PM
21. I think that the efforts to investigate the correctness of the registered voter and ballot numbers would have more credibility with non-Rossi supporters if it also included an investigation into the 69% of ballots that were cast in all the other counties. There have been very curious numbers coming out of many other counties, and by choosing to only target King County, no matter how valid the reasons might be - should they prove to pan out - will look more like a desperate attempt to undo the final result, and less like trying to uphold a fair election count.

For example, here are a few things we should also be investigating:

- Why did the final count in Adams County change by 0.788% (almost 1%) in the machine recount? As a percentage this was 9 times the average change, and 7 times greater than the percentage change in King County?

- Pierce County added 459 votes to the tally after their manual recount. This resulted in a 0.303% change to the original tally, double the rate of King County's adjustment. Where did all those votes come from?

- Walla Walla County's manual count resulted in a 0.486% adjustment, again a whopping change compared to the rest of the state. Where did those 100 votes come from?

- In addition to those 3 counties, Cowlitz, Grant, Kittitas, and Skagit counties all produced new votes at a greater percentage of their original counts than King County did. Put together these 7 counties account for 17% of the ballots counted. If you add to that Spokane, Pend Oreille, Ferry and Garfield counties, that also had higher percentages after the machine recount than King County did, that makes up 24% of the ballots cast.

So in all, anwful lot of other fishy votes that I'm not hearing about anyone investigating, that should be.

Posted by: Daniel K. on December 31, 2004 05:42 PM
22. If the democrats loose this election by fraud or by another election, they will probably be out the 750,000 in election costs (unless someone misses the deadline in Olympia again)- Perhaps we have a conflict of interest due to this money- who wouldn't fight loosing that amount.


Could someone tell me when the last voter fraud was prosecuted? Even today, I still not have heard of any investigation internally- if we ar e not going to enforce voter fraud, then lets remove those laws from the books.

Seems silly to have soldiers dying overseas so they can hold elections while in our own country, we will not count those military votes? Why not pull out of that country and just let King county decide who should rule that country- it sure would save on election costs and the need for people risking to vote next month in that country.

Posted by: Dennis Hendricks on December 31, 2004 05:58 PM
23. If the democrats loose this election by fraud or by another election, they will probably be out the 750,000 in election costs (unless someone misses the deadline in Olympia again)- Perhaps we have a conflict of interest due to this money- who wouldn't fight loosing that amount.


Could someone tell me when the last voter fraud was prosecuted? Even today, I still not have heard of any investigation internally- if we ar e not going to enforce voter fraud, then lets remove those laws from the books.

Seems silly to have soldiers dying overseas so they can hold elections while in our own country, we will not count those military votes? Why not pull out of that country and just let King county decide who should rule that country- it sure would save on election costs and the need for people risking to vote next month in that country.

Posted by: Dennis Hendricks on December 31, 2004 05:58 PM
24. I should add that where as King County, representing 31% of the votes altered their count by 1524 votes, those other counties representing 24% of the votes altered their count by 1746 votes.

Posted by: Daniel K. on December 31, 2004 06:00 PM
25. Daniel K:

You're a bright guy, right? Well...START INVESTIGATING!! You only have until January 12th, you better start calling those counties and asking for their voter rolls and their results.

Help us out, man! King Cook County is so huge and so messed up that it may take 12 Sharks to sort it out.

Do us all a favor and start looking into those other counties! Personally I think Sam Reed is incompentent - you're pointing out further reasons why. If the whole state is F'ed up we have even more reasons to have a re-vote.

GET TO IT!

Posted by: Larry on December 31, 2004 06:03 PM
26. Posted by Daniel K. at December 31, 2004 06:00 PM

Shark has done his investigation of King and Snohomish Counties (over 40% of the state voters) purely as an unpaid volunteer.

You mention the following 11 counties: Adams, Pierce, Walla Walla, Cowlitz, Grant, Kittitas, Skagit, Spokane, Pend Oreille, Ferry and Garfield. These 11 counties have only 24% of the state voters.

Please contact the county auditors of each county, and request them to provide you with a list of the people who voted in the November 2004 general election. Then count the number of those people, and compare it with the total number of ballots that each of those counties reported counted.

Also, get the precinct by precinct canvass data from all three counts (initial count, machine recount, manual recount) and compare any changes between the three counts. Also, compare this to the number of people from each precinct who actually voted.

The Shark has done this for more than 40% of the state on a purely volunteer basis. So I am looking forward to you and any number of your friends doing the same for the 24% of the state that you have specified, and reporting the results to us.

(By the way, Pierce County, the state's second largest, has a Democrat auditor and an all-Democrat canvassing board. So does Cowlitz County. Only about half the votes in the 24% that you question comes from GOP-controlled counties.)

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 31, 2004 06:05 PM
27. Richard wrote: "(By the way, Pierce County, the state's second largest, has a Democrat auditor and an all-Democrat canvassing board. So does Cowlitz County. Only about half the votes in the 24% that you question comes from GOP-controlled counties.)"

I don't care who is running the show. My point is if you are going to investigate these things it should be done everywhere. Rossi won Pierce County by 12,000 votes, so that makes it a red county.

Posted by: Daniel K on December 31, 2004 06:13 PM
28. Thank you for your continued efforts in this. You remind me of the PowerLine 'bloggers taking on MSM and Dan Rather. BTW, I will be wearing orange on the 12th.

Posted by: Susan on December 31, 2004 06:20 PM
29. Daniel,

I applaud you for your initiative. Pick up a virtual shovel, target your favorite county and join in the distributed investigation. Share your results and I'll be sure to post them.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 31, 2004 06:20 PM
30. Am I wrong in inferring that this means that King County had greater than 100% voter turnout of registered voters? Even 100% turnout would be unprecidented.

Posted by: Eric Anondson on December 31, 2004 06:28 PM
31. Eric Anondson: Yes, you would be wrong in making that inference. The turnout was more like 83%. Go hear for that info: http://www.vote.wa.gov/general/recount_status.aspx

Posted by: Daniel K on December 31, 2004 06:31 PM
32. Eric, in summary, there are more ballots than actual voters, not more ballots than eligible voters. King County's list of people who voted in the election contains about 3500 fewer voters than the number of ballots that were counted in the hand recount (which was a larger number than either of the previous counts).

Posted by: timekeeper on December 31, 2004 06:42 PM
33. Stefan - You did us proud today on KIRO! Bless your heart!

Posted by: CP on December 31, 2004 07:57 PM
34. Lonewolf?

Is that you? From TB2K?

Posted by: Deborah on December 31, 2004 08:28 PM
35. If ever we get to a ReVote, who will tally King County this time around? My 3 year old can count better than what we've seen to date! My fear during a ReVote/reKINGcount is their mathematic ineptitude will be visible yet again--even despite massive amounts of national scrutiny...

1, 2, 3, er--uh? 129?

Posted by: Larabeth on December 31, 2004 09:01 PM
36. Stefan, amazing job man! We keep linking to your articles over on therightsociety.com and are waiting and watching with the rest of the state..

to say sam reed is showing incompetence is wildy understated, but such is our road to hoe this year it seems..

Posted by: Lauri on January 1, 2005 12:13 AM
37. Whoa.....

I have just spent an hour in the KC voter list as supplied by the Seattle Times.....

Just put in a last name and go down the list...You will find many duplicate names with the same city and zip codes..

One thing I noticed that I thought was odd...Many on the list with the same first and last name and the same city and zip - have either a J or an L as their middle initial..
Now - it could be that the initials J or L are just very common and just happen to appear in otherwise duplicate listings...Just thought it was odd...

And the list doesn't appear to be in precise alphabetical order....Here is an example of a duplicate - notice how it's listed out of order..
JULIE D WOOD SAMMAMISH 98074 Voted Absentee
JULIE WOOD SEATTLE 98115 Voted Absentee
JULIE ANN WOOD REDMOND 98052 Voted Absentee
JULIE D WOOD SAMMAMISH 98074 Voted Absentee

This is exactly how it's listed in the list...and there are many like this....

Posted by: Deborah on January 1, 2005 01:14 AM
38. Deborah: Did it ever occur to you that, out of approx. 1 million King County registered voters, there may be four named Julie Wood?

Check out whitepages.com. There are listings for a J B Wood in 98155, two listings for J Wood in 98074, and 2 for Julie Wood in 98052. There may be others who are not listed.

Of course, that proves nothing, but neither does the amateur sleuthing and numerology going on in this site. If Rossi thinks there was substantial fraud in the election, he should say so and back it up with evidence and statements made under oath. Asking for a revote based on idle speculation and whining about losing the recount just doesn't cut it.

Posted by: scottd on January 1, 2005 07:29 AM
39. Of course, that proves nothing, but neither does the amateur sleuthing and numerology going on in this site. If Rossi thinks there was substantial fraud in the election, he should say so and back it up with evidence and statements made under oath. Asking for a revote based on idle speculation and whining about losing the recount just doesn't cut it.

Another case of circular thinking...repubs are expected to provide evidence of wrongdoing to justify starting an investigation...but if we understood what the violations were, an investigation would be redundant.

We know for sure that there's a lot here that doesn't pass the giggle test. We're told it's not the job of Sam Reed or Dean Logan to investigate possible fraud. These irregularities identified by voters have been news to Logan, and to Reed.

I think it's not a coincidence that there's so much defense of fraud...if some here believe the quality of investigation doesn't rise to professional standards, they can call Sam Reed's office and ask why it isn't being conducted by him.

Posted by: South County on January 1, 2005 07:45 AM
40. South County: I don't see anything circular in my argument and I don't expect amateur bloggers to carry the investigative burden.

But Rossi and Chris Vance have access to professional staff. If they don't think Sam Reed and Dean Logan are doing their jobs, or if they have evidence of fraud, they can mount a formal challenge and force Reed and Logan to defend themselves. That's the way our system works. Maybe they'll get around to doing that someday soon, but so far they have chosen to make their arguments in the press where there are no standards for evidence and no opportunity for detailed response. My response to Deborah's post was an illustration of the weakness of this kind of argument.

BTW, if you can find anything in my post that defends voter fraud, please point it out. I'm dead set against it and I hope anyone engaging in it is prosecuted.

Posted by: scottd on January 1, 2005 08:10 AM
41. Looks like more of the "go along to get along" policy in the state government, Reed has to survive in Olympia whether it's under Gregoire or Rossi, after nearly 2 months of contested ballots Reed signed off on this, with all the irregularities, clearly signalling his allegances. Any pretense of ignorance by Sam is wasted. Fat chance of getting any semblance of a performance audit now. As for Gregoire: Tyrants have always some slight shade of virtue; they support the laws before destroying them.
--Voltaire

Posted by: Jack on January 1, 2005 09:58 AM
42. I think we're wasting time. Is there any doubt that if a careful recount that actually checks out all the discrepencies takes place and Rossi wins, that the Dems will find another x+ votes to ensure that Gregoire wins.
Simplest answer. Go back to the results of the second recount.

Posted by: Rabblais on January 1, 2005 10:59 AM
43. Methinks the "scottd's" of the world protest too loudly...

The amateurs are the ones providing what little honest oversight we have.

Screw the "professionals." They are the ones that have given us suspect election after suspect election here and nationwide. The system is broken and it's administrators with it. Throw it all out and start over, after replacing everyone connected with it.

First job qualification: No experience. No experience alllowed.

And impeach Reed...

Posted by: Third Party Voter on January 1, 2005 11:10 AM
44. I read a letter in the editorial pages (either the Seattle Times or the Tacoma Tribune) during the last recount. It was written by a King County poll worker. He(she)indicated that when the recount was almost finished the count was stopped early one day. The next day the trays to be counted had votes from other precints and other changes from the norm. Could this be when many of the variences occurred? Don't have the date but could find it if it was deemed useful.

Posted by: Robert Lambton on January 1, 2005 11:15 AM
45. Rossi is obviously DONE!

And he continues to build his reputation only as a mighty sore loser.

Remember that stupid sign on I-5 near Fife when he and his were urging that the Governor elect "do the right thing and concede?"

Another single piece of idiocy on the long path to the "nowhere" that Dino Rossi deserves.

Now the moron wants a new election!!! Of course he does... he's a loser!

In fact, not only that, but he wants to take the chance that some "Ron Sims" write-in idiots will actually take the opportunity to help decide the race this time, altering their authentic votes to become the fraudulent votes that "might" see Dino win one for once.

I saw some dimwitted Rossi supporter at Pike Place Market (of all places) on Thursday, holding a sign suggesting that King County's voters somehow cheated.

LOL - we went to the polling place, cast our votes as we saw fit, and elected our next Governor. Now what was "cheating" about that??

I looked at the fool and thought he should have been holding an "Al Gore in 2000" sign too!

Tell Dino Rossi that it is long past time to roll over and die on this one, lest he sacrifice any future political career he has. (as Al Gore did)

I think the Seattle alternative publication "The Stranger" best summarized Dino Rossi's present position this week:

There were a pair of photos side-by-side, the first was Dino Rossi as he appeared during his campaign, and the second was the "poisoned" version of the Ukrainian candidate. The caption read: "Rossi Poisoned"

Posted by: King County is the only one that matters on January 1, 2005 12:30 PM
46. Chuck,
you are so Right about the extinction. After the Nov 2nd election I watched every political talk show for weeks. The big question was, what happen?
Everyone chimed in their opinion and it was very interesting to listen to the Democrats trying to explain it. Of course they blamed Kerry but had different excuses for other nation wide races. They were all told why and the funniest thing of all is that they still don't get it.
Well I did see a hint of a new shift when Paul Berendt said after the THIRD count that Grinchoire was divinely appointed or something along those lines.
I don't think it will show it's ugly head for a few more elections but we might just see a surge of Independent voters but not in Washington since we have the two party primary now. The Republicans need to lovingly welcome over all the conservative Democrats and I think Gregoire helped us a little there. So she's not all that bad.

Posted by: CJensen on January 1, 2005 12:52 PM
47. Are there precincts where the turnout was greater than 100%?

Posted by: dcalfine on January 1, 2005 04:07 PM
48. How did Washington get to this? I am reminded of when I lived in Kalifornia and the republican party had won the legislature by one seat. The republicans were so incompetent, one of their own members decided to vote for Willie Brown, the democrat, as Speaker. Sam Reed reminds me of that scenario. BTW-Sam Reed, don't run for re-election, you will only get trounced in the primary.

Smegma

Posted by: smegma on January 1, 2005 05:40 PM
49. scottd,

I make no claims of being a professional sleuth..My background is more in profiling and analysis. I look for risks and patterns and consistencies and inconsistencies. That is what I do. I've done it for 20+ years. I wish in my career, my professional duties were as simple as glancing at a list for irregularities and inconsistencies....

What really stood out about the sample of the list I posted was the irregularity of the alphabet sequence. Julie D Wood is listed first, then Julie Wood, Julie Ann Wood....then back to Julie D Wood again...I saw this over and over again in the list....just in the Woods! I'm just wondering what the explanation is for this? Obviously the list wasn't sublisted into city or zipcode categories as both listings for Julie D Wood are identical yet separated by two other Julie Woods from different citys and zips...

It's just *one* of those oddity's that make you go ......Why?

Posted by: Deborah on January 1, 2005 06:50 PM
50. The Woods are a great place to get lost in. They are also wonderful when you want to hide.

I don't have a dog in this hunt, since I have resettled to the great state of Texas (you think Washington State politics is rough, think again, and I speak as a member of the 'majority' here). I must say, Washington has all the makings of LBJ's Texas in 1960...

Posted by: smegma on January 1, 2005 07:06 PM
51. Heh....
smegma,

Getting lost in the *Woods* is looking a lot easier than getting lost in the *Jones*! ACK! I'm going to wait a day or so before I wander into the *Smiths*! All joking aside... The possibilities for fraud truly are staggering....I think if everyone looks at the numbers and the list from a different angle..we will find many interesting things.....I know Stefan has been amazing!

Here's a thought!
What if we sent the King County list to the AUTINET - Autistic internet network...we could have this solved in hours! They are amazing with patterns and inconsistencies! Heck! They could even tell you which zip codes didn't match the city stated......at a glance! My hat is off to the incredible abilities of Autistic's and Aspergers!

Posted by: Deborah on January 1, 2005 07:59 PM
52. Thanks, Deborah! I had not thought of that, but I care enough about this that only extreme measures such as your suggestion will rid us of fraud. Oh, and perhaps some divine intervention, too!

I hope you know that only registered voters (autistic or not) can be used...oh, I forgot, that only applies to republicans...

Posted by: smegma on January 1, 2005 08:59 PM
53. If we don't get a revote I fear we will be governed by these same fleasy rules as the ones that turned the election over. I am planing to start a corporation up again but not in this state, I will do it in Nevada unless Dino Rossi is elected properly.

Posted by: Bert A. Overland on January 3, 2005 06:09 AM
54. Yes, there should be a revote. Not because I am glad that Gregiore won, but because I believe there should be ONE PERSON ONE VOTE, regardless of the outcome. OUR VOTING RIGHTS ARE the foundation of our democracy, and the foundation of it's greatness!!! Otherwise how on earth does anyone REALLY know who has been won or who has been cheating? Same arguements could be made about the presidential election.

Posted by: Cindy Turner on January 4, 2005 06:37 AM
55. I would like to know how a person can win an election 2 times and be defeated by someone verily winning one time.
We need to revote.
This is all sounding like Russia not Washington State.

Posted by: JBR on April 12, 2005 11:00 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?