UPDATE: Good news! The first mystery seems to have been solved. Kevin DeGraaf is on the books as both "DeGraaf" and "De Graaf". DeGraaf didn't vote, but De Graaf did. Kevin's vote was counted (once). Thanks to the reader who posted this in the comments. One down, many more to go.
So far we've also heard from Zach McDonald of North Bend and Woosok Park of Redmond (by way of his son-in-law), who insist that they voted, even though they're in the database, but King County shows that they didn't vote.
According to this database, they have me listed in the wrong precinct, and said I didn't vote. They have my wife just fine, and we both received absentee ballots and voted together. I voted for Dino Rossi, and now I wonder if they even counted my vote.No, they didn't count his vote. The verifiable elements of Kevin's story check out: He and his wife, Evangeline, live at 20526 22nd Ct in Sammamish 98074. Evangeline is registered there and her absentee ballot was counted.
But Kevin is recorded as not having voted. It turns out that he is registered on W Galer St in Seattle 98199. The King County database shows that he has not voted since November 1992. Kevin responds:
The address is more than 10 years old, which is strange, since I got my absentee ballot, and have voted non-absentee with my address and information apparently correct and up to date. I'll be contacting the Dino Rossi campaign about this.I have no way to confirm that he did vote all these years even though the King County database says otherwise. But I've seen enough errors in the county records to believe readers like Kevin before I believe the county.
...
I have voted in every major election since 1992 (I might have missed some minor ones), until maybe 5 years ago, I voted in person at the local precinct without any apparent problem. I have been receiving absentee ballots along with my wife since then, so I presumed my registration info was accurate.
Larry Phillips might not help a Sammamish voter, but I know the Rossi campaign will.
If you have a similar story of King County Elections incompetence and disenfranchisement, please drop us a line. More importantly, tell the Rossi campaign. Help them help you overturn this filthy election.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 01, 2005 09:13 PM | Email ThisI suspect that King County used it's lax record keeping as a feature to create the counting result that favored Gregoire.
BUT, I don't care if you are a far left Democrat, any one with a shred of decency or objectivity should see the irregularities of this election as too many to render and accurate result.
If you are at all honest with yourself, you have to be calling for a revote, investigation of what went wrong, and an aggressive rewrite of the law that cleans up the process and removes the third time's a charm of the hand recount, etc.
If I were in office and any of this happened under my watch, I would issue an immediate apology to the state of WA and resign.
If you are an honest Democrat, go to www.revotewa.com and sign the petiion.
They should not be for convenience and laziness. But the Donks like it that way. They love fuzzy and chaotic elections with which they can jerk around the final tallies in the urban precincts.
Posted by: dennisw on January 1, 2005 10:22 PMThis website is fascinating on so many levels - the switch from a smug 'Dems go home' attitude to one of righteous indignation as the election results shifted (If the Dems and Rebubs current situations were reversed you'd still be agitating for a revote? I don't think so!) all the way to the crazy conspiracy theorists working overtime. Rossi is a loser, albeit a close one, and you guys need to get your registration sorted out so that your vote counts next time.
Rossi is blowing his future political career (vs. Cantwell?) by playing the poor loser.
Posted by: Term on January 1, 2005 10:30 PMI have-
I dont know to many homeless people who even know what day it is. A lot of the reasons people are homeless is due to mental illness that is left untreated and drug and etoh addiction, and obvious other reasons.
I'm wondering how many homeless people were even interested in voting in the first place.
I see a lot of comments similar to Term's above, stating that the Rossi camp is inconsistent in asking for a revote now because they would (supposedly) be satisfied with the process had Rossi still been ahead after the 3rd "count". I can't let my training in logic go to waste! Even if you grant the assumption that Rossi's supporters would oppose a revote had he remained ahead in the vote (something I don't think is a certainty at all...), the claim of inconsistency presupposes something that I think escapes the D's on this one: the third "recount" was apparently manipulated in a one-sided manner. As it has been pointed out elsewhere on this site, machines make *random* errors (and fewer errors total, in all probability, than humans do). There are perfectly reasonable and logically consistent grounds to accept the first two counts while rejecting the third. If the D's can't understand that, ... well, they never were very good with logic anyway.
Posted by: Moscow Mark on January 1, 2005 10:46 PMYeah, sure. And there were perfectly reasonable and logically consistent grounds for Bush to hand Gore the presidency in 2000 (e.g., Gore got half a million more votes). The law says the manual recount trumps the machine counts. Sorry.
Posted by: Bruce on January 1, 2005 11:24 PMThere they go again.... Let's see, what difference in these two situations might we point out to Bruce? There's really no comparison to popular vote vs. electoral college and machine count vs. manipulated hand recount. (Aside: ever notice the root of the word "manipulated"?) Campaigns for the presidency are designed and run with the goal of getting a majority of the electoral college. It would truly be a remarkable thing to change the rules to a new goal after the fact. But how does one run a campaign based on the strategy of getting a majority in a manual recount vs. getting a majority in a machine count? Or perhaps is that exactly what the Washington Democratic party has been doing?
Posted by: Moscow Mark on January 1, 2005 11:44 PMOf course, I suspect, that isn't as exciting or juicy a thought as conspiracy theorists sold on fraud would like.
What is missing is verification. Part of the onus has to be on the voter to verify his vote was received. Unfortunately I know of no way to do that until after it is too late and the votes have been counted.
Posted by: Daniel K on January 2, 2005 12:44 AMActually you mean the second recount. And it was performed by groups made up of supporters of both parties. So it was not one-sided.
I suggest you read this article, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/dannywestneat/2002123626_danny18.html, which shines a very helpful light on how the process was performed. Since you do not live in Washington I suspect you have had less insight into much of the process.
Posted by: Daniel K on January 2, 2005 12:51 AM... and King Co has always been incompetent.
Jeez! in as close election that this was - the winner always decided by party politics - always has - always will
lets move on because you are not going to change anything about voter disenfranchisement in this close of an election!
Sorry to put it this way, but you are pretty much clueless. I was a Republican Observer during the manual recount. You are under the impression that Observers got to see every operation of King County elections. They did not.
If you read the posts, you will see that what's really going on here is incredible icompetence. What KC officials have done is manipulate that incompetence to favor a Gregoire result.
If you have a bunch of illegitimate ballots, that were either cast fraudulently by individuals or even some group outside of KC Elections, but otherwise independent, then it would be easy to create the 71 unnacounted for ballots in Precinct 1823. King County has most likely manipulated the data on these provisionals to turn them into counted votes even though they are not legitimate.
None of that action had to happen on the general counting floor where the vast majority of the counting took place and was conducted by honest folks being watched very closely.
It's all about mining and manipulation of the database with regard to provisionals and absentee ballots on hand. If they had properly maintained the database, it would not have been possible to count many ballots that were accepted due to bad entries in the database.
Clearly this is an allegation at this point, but it's easy to connect the dots to see how this may have happened.
Despite what you say, this is not about a smug attitude of "Dems Go Home" even if some comments here are just prejudiced attacks on the Dems, what it is about is a growing body of evidence that suggests to most rational Washingtonions that we cannot trust the result of the gubernatorial election.
Study the information Stefan has presented and see if you don't come to that conclusion yourself. There are a lot of very obvious questions without answers. Anyone honest with themselves would want believable answers to these questions raised by all of the irregularities.
lets see
Tilden v Hayes
Cleveland v Harrison
Nixon v Kennedy
Bush v Gore
Will see who is clueless when this is all over ... because it already is all over.
King Col is a 'confederacy of dunces'
but so what... if you think you are going to change this you are wrong.
so accept this and move on.
and if you don't believe me ... i will prove it to you ... all you have to do is wait until happens again, which won't be too long.
JPO
Come the general election, my absentee shows up but my wifes does not. On election day, we went down to our polling place for my wife to cast a provisional ballot as they had her as permanent absentee, so she couldn't just vote at the polling place. They gave her the provisional ballot, but forgot to have her sign the book. Had I not been there and pointed it out to the clueless poll worker, her vote would have been thrown out (this is one reason why we need professionally-run elections!)
They gave us a ballot number and told us we could check in a week or so to see if her ballot was counted. I did and they said it was. Now, come the Seattle Times "list of voters", it does not list her as having voted. I contacted the Rossi campaign and they said that the list provided by King County is such a mess that I should check with King County on Monday to see if her ballot was counted. I intend to and if they say it was not counted, we will be in touch with the Rossi campaign.
Posted by: Scott in Carnation on January 2, 2005 08:02 AMKev, perhaps you should write a letter to the KCEO and ask both for a name change (since they screwed it up originally it appears), as well as information to determine whether or not you have a recorded vote since 1992.
Posted by: bmvaughn on January 2, 2005 08:57 AMRegistration Date: 9/11/1993
Congressional District: 08
State Senate District: 45
State House District: 045
Judicial District: E
Precinct: SAM 45-2620
VOTING HISTORY
GENERAL ELECTION 2003: VOTED
SPECIAL ELECTION 2003: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2002: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2001: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2000: VOTED
SPECIAL ELECTION 2000: VOTED
SPECIAL ELECTION 2000: VOTED
HE IS ON THE BOOKS TWICE! First, with his original registration recorded as "Kevin DeGraaf" and with a newer registration recorded as "Kevin De Graaf". Look at the registration dates and voting records. And also I am sure the address on the earlier registration was right at some point in time.
HE COULD HAVE VOTED TWICE! But didn't, since he is a Republican. However, I am surprised that some Democrat didn't vote for him at the original registration address and precinct in Seattle.
It used to be that these things wouldn't happen. If you had an existing registration, they gave you a card to fill out to change your address within King County. If you wanted to do a new registration, you had to execute a new form that was witnessed by a deputy registrar.
Now, if you want to change your address, they give you the same form that someone would fill out if they weren't already registered. And it doesn't get witnessed or notarized either -- you just fill it out on your own (see this link for registration form):
http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/003311.html
In Item 12, it ask if you are already registered. However, that item is in a far corner of the document, and is easily overlooked. Nor is it pointed out to people. The main signature required in Item 9, far above item 12 asking if you are already registered.
In fact, I have changed my address twice in the last two years, using this same form. I don't think I ever filled out Item 12. I wasn't asked to by the elections workers (I did it at the KC Elections Office both times). In fact, I thought Item 12 was part of the request for an ongoing absentee ballot, which is exactly what it looks like.
Fortunately, I am only registered once. I handed the form in person to KC Elections workers, who entered it into the system immediately. That "special" treatment was done because I was filing for office (KC Assessor in 2003, and PCO in 2004), and they needed their database up-to-date right away to process my candidacy form.
Had the registration form simply come to KC Elections anonymously, like the vast majority of them do, I might very well be registered twice or even three times. Or, if the KC Elections people not known I was a Republican (since both offices I ran for are partisan), maybe I would have also had a duplicate or triplicate registration.
This would explain why married women (and probably a good number of divorced women) appear to be on the registration rolls twice. If a woman (or anyone else for that matter) decides to use a different last name, or otherwise change their name, they are told to simply fill out a new registration form. If they don't complete Item 12, or it is otherwise overlooked by KC elections, odds are that they will end up on the registration rolls twice.
The driver's license or last 4 of SSN does not do a good job of weeding these things out. This has only been a requirement in more recent years. It is not even required, since you can show ID when voting for the first time. Many people think the registration form is public record, and don't want other people to see their private ID numbers. And if the driver's license number is used -- this will change when you change your last name, and can't possibly detect the fact that you are already registered.
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 2, 2005 10:26 AMUntil every "De Graaf" like question has a good answer, I won't trust the result of the election.
LOL! The arguments here just keep getting better!
Let me know if you actually find a significant pattern of people voting twice or dead people voting. Hell, let me know if you actually find a single instance.
I wonder if one was not counted because it was considered a duplicate. Perhaps this is the ballot that Zach McDonald of North Bend cast.
Posted by: DeadWood on January 2, 2005 11:05 AMActually, my earlier comment was more directed at the many people on this blog who claim that there have been numerous cases of dead people voting (or people voting twice), yet have been unable to produce evidence of a single case.
In the end, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few isolated cases, but it's going to take more than that to overturn an election. Anyway, good luck in your hunt.
Posted by: scottd on January 2, 2005 12:53 PMMost of Washington has no faith in Sam Reed or in King County elections. This has to be done over to get a result that anyone trusts. It's hard for Democrats to admit this because you'd like to take the "third count stands" result, have Gregoire as governor, and call it all good.
But to do that ignores the reality of what has happened here. Wake up Scott D and realize that neglicence and bad intentions can and do happen. 129 out of 3 Million in the highly charged climate that was Election 2004 is more probable than not.
Revote.
If that evidence actually shows up, Rossi may have a good case for challenging the election. So far, the effort seems more directed at bypassing that process and trying to go directly to a revote just because some of you think something doesn't feel right about the last election. Good luck.
just because the voter's sex was improperly recorded.
Posted by: scottd on January 2, 2005 01:46 PMThat's the reason why so many in the state are frustrated. Even people who are not following this closely have the common sense to realize that something is not right, and that when the result is this close, that "not right" could easily be the difference in the election.
The only fair approach that will provide the closure that the majority of Washingtonions seek is a recontest. Most likely a recontest will have a winner by an obvious margin and then we can all stop speculating.
What is also obvious to most Washingtonions is that Gregoire specifically called this a tie during the first two counts and now calls this a victory. Public opinion is not in the Gregoire camp, which is also a matter of fact shown by the polls.
If Democrats are so sure of Gregoire, what are they afraid of in holding a recontest?
I think there's the possibility that some of the encouragement Dino (and the party) is receiving to continue this protest might be coming from opponents who are happy to make the Republicans look like whiners.
Posted by: steve miller on January 2, 2005 02:09 PMThe election system in the USA, not just Washington, needs to be improved. We knew that 4 years ago. Those closer to the process probably knew it longer than that. Yet, during the Republican controlled 4 years from 2001 to now little has been done to deal with the problems.
So, the way to take this energy of concern and turn it into real results, is to work from the bottom up and fix the problems. Determine and implement better ways to register and verify voter registrations. Determine and implement better ways to verify votes cast and counting them. Better ways to do a lot of the things people are concerned weren't done very well.
The election was close. Sometimes it will be. That's reality. And if a candidate wins by just one vote that is still a win. By doing all the above things we strive to make small errors rare, yet I don't suspect we can eliminate them all.
The case of Kevin De Graaf vs. Kevin DeGraaf, is a good example of how information can be misinterpreted. Look at the data, find anomalies, but withhold judgement until all the facts have been looked at and addressed by all parties involved.
Posted by: Daniel K on January 2, 2005 02:27 PMAny large database is going to have numerous data entry errors and obsolete entries, and King County is no exception. So far, no one has demonstrated how these errors are material to invalidating cast ballots. Improperly recorded sex, misspelled names, etc. don't invalidate votes. Having dead people in the database is common, and it isn't a problem -- unless they vote. Same for duplicated entries. I doubt if any court is going to throw out an election due to these kinds of errors. Doing so would invite challenges to elections across the country because every voter database is going to have similar problems.
You sound like a reasonable person, but I think your sense of what is fair in this case may be colored by your disappointment in the election results. From where I sit, I don't see a majority of citizens calling out for a revote -- but I could be wrong. If you can get a majority in the statehouse to agree with you, it really won't matter what I think.
Posted by: scottd on January 2, 2005 02:40 PMThere will be a fair number of duplicate registrations among people with compound names (like "De Graaf"), which can be entered into the system with different spacings, hyphenations, etc.
However, there will be an even greater number which result from wholesale name changes -- such as women who change their name on marriage and/or divorce, or people who legally change their names by court order.
It would be impossible to reliably track these people without getting dates of birth, and then looking at the (up to about 100) registered voters born on each particular date, and checking the records for similarilities (similar addresses, similar first names, etc.).
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 2, 2005 03:02 PMThe election system in the USA, not just Washington, needs to be improved. We knew that 4 years ago. Those closer to the process probably knew it longer than that. Yet, during the Republican controlled 4 years from 2001 to now little has been done to deal with the problems.
Yet, the problems are predominantly in RAT administered counties. That was true in Florida in 2000, and true in King County in 2000...and 2002...and 2004.
So, the way to take this energy of concern and turn it into real results, is to work from the bottom up and fix the problems. Determine and implement better ways to register and verify voter registrations. Determine and implement better ways to verify votes cast and counting them. Better ways to do a lot of the things people are concerned weren't done very well.
We can't say if the procedues are sufficient or not, because execution was poor. From absentee ballots sent out late to servicemen, to duplicate absentee ballots, to nine separate cases of ballots "found" in King County, to enhanced ballots during the machine recount, to the "Go DEMS!" written on the gloves of election workers, to the SGT. Schultz response to problems...is the problem fraud, or incompetence? There's no way to know. This situation does not require a bottom-up solution, it requires accountability NOW, for incompetence NOW.
Posted by: South County on January 2, 2005 03:12 PMRichard - I think that it shouldn't just be the GOP that checks the list. Why not call for a bipartisan commission to do so?
awohleb - One can be an honest Democrat and not want a re-vote. One can be an honest Independant and not want a re-vote. Less hyperbole and more reasoned discussion will go a long way to legitimizing any request for a re-vote.
Posted by: Daniel K on January 2, 2005 03:20 PMJeff didn't say that the election should be canceled because the election was close. You are engaging in straw man arguments, or mind reading, or projection there. There are serious issues of process here, and we have no choice but to continue our efforts; Sam Reed is in denial, and Dean Logan is in denial, as are you.
Any large database is going to have numerous data entry errors and obsolete entries, and King County is no exception. So far, no one has demonstrated how these errors are material to invalidating cast ballots. Improperly recorded sex, misspelled names, etc. don't invalidate votes. Having dead people in the database is common, and it isn't a problem -- unless they vote. Same for duplicated entries. I doubt if any court is going to throw out an election due to these kinds of errors. Doing so would invite challenges to elections across the country because every voter database is going to have similar problems.
Jeff hasn't said that the election should be tossed out because of database error...
You sound like a reasonable person, but I think your sense of what is fair in this case may be colored by your disappointment in the election results. From where I sit, I don't see a majority of citizens calling out for a revote -- but I could be wrong. If you can get a majority in the statehouse to agree with you, it really won't matter what I think.
Engaging in projection there...as long as Reed/Logan/RATs continue to deny the problem, we'll have no choice but to keep on keepin' on.
Reasonable Washingtonions agree that the data problems with the KC voter DB have gone beyond simple errors.
Hypothetically, what if we found just 40 instances of proveable error that would have swayed the election? Wouldn't you want more scrutiny in an election this close? It stands to reason if you find a non trivial number of votes with serious problems, that there may have been invalid votes that were also not found.
When you see hundreds of voters registered to storage facilities and mail box rental outlets, don't you, a reasonable voter, question the result? Should any voter be registered to a storage facility? Aside from the nightkeepers that sometimes live at these facilities in a small apartment, there is no other reason that such a facility could possibly be a valid residence. There's no running water or toilet facilites, let alone heat, food storage, etc.
Go back and read the posts. There's more than enough irregularity to arise suspicion in the minds of rational Washingtonions.
As I have said before, at this point, I could really care less if Gregoire wins, as long as it is a legitimate win that the majority of Washingtonions would call an accurate outcome.
He was one of Carlson's picks. He was touted as a man of extreme integrity. He won re-election by 6 points and got 51% of the vote.
Now you have people here posting that the state doesn't have confidence in him and that he's in over his head???
He's taken on both parties and hasn't lost a single judge at the WSSC. If you guys weren't so over the top partisan you would take a step back and realize that every thing in the process has been conducted according to the law.
Perhaps he has a better handle on election law than the average poster to this site. Was the election perfect - nope....but that's a long way from fraudulent.
It's a new year, the Hawks will host a playoff game, the M's picked up some slugging free agents and CG will be the gov. in 2 weeks - smile a little, things are looking up in Wa.
Posted by: FlaRich on January 2, 2005 04:34 PMUh, six weeks ago, Sam Reed had not certified an election recount when there were a lot of very legitimate irregularities that demanded investigation.
Uh, six weeks ago, many in a position to influence Sam Reed, including longtime friends and other government officials were not calling for him to hold off certification until the irregularities in King County were better understood.
Uh, six weeks ago, Sam Reed had not yet said that the elections were conducted quite well, a statement that is obviously for his own benefit since elections are his responsibility, when there were so many problems in King County that still needed evaluation.
There is little doubt that the process of when we hold elections, manual recounts, hand recounts, etc. was conducted according to law, but that is a straw man argument for the serious doubt that many have for the accuracy of the election, the possible errors in the voter roll that may have allowed invalid votes to be counted, partisan canvassing behavior, etc.
Nice try bringing sports in to the argument as a distraction to try and get us to forget about the election discrepancies at hand. Whether we are excited or not about the Seahawks post-season prospects has little bearing on the much more important issue of who will govern the state.
A large number of Democrats split ticket for Murray, Kerry and Rossi. Clearly there is a lot of unrest at how this state has been run. Rational Washingtonions (both Dems and Repubs) are concerned about the serious negligence in King County that even if ultimately discovered to be within the law, will have definitely had an effect on the miniscule margin of this election.
Rational Washingtonions don't want electioneering to determine our Governor, we want an honest and accurate vote, and it's disgusting that we have had any less in the country that is supposedly a beacon of trustworthy elections for the rest of the world.
Many states require a run-off if the winner doesn't get one more than fifty percent, otherwise known as a Majority. With write-ins this almost guarantees an election can never be decided the way this one may be.
It takes 25% to initiate a recall for gov or Sec of State and some corrupt judge could still annul it.
It doesn't take 25% to change the recall law by initiative.
When all this is said and done some heads need to roll in Bellevue. There should have been a legal challenge to altering those ballots in King County after the first machine count. As far as I know it wasn't done elsewhere and it's too subjective anyway. We'd be on much firmer ground if there had been. The other really boneheaded misjudgment the party made is not getting an injunction to keep Reed from certifying.. ever hear possession is 9/10th's people?
These numbers Stefan has been anaylizing seem compelling to me. However do we have numbers from elsewhere, say Pierce County, that might shed light on whether KC could turn out to be a statistical abnormality or is in fact typical relative to the different categories of voters and votes certified. What I mean is does anything in the final tally in PC suggest KC may reasonably be able to account for those over-votes? I suppose the numbers would be a little skewed with the military bases, but we should still be able to get an idea.
Three things need to happen, like right now..
1. A court order demanding a prompt accounting of those over-votes.. KC is obviously dragging it's feet. They need to feel the pressure, the data is needed in short order to mount a contest--the sooner the better, waiting till Jan 11th isn't advisable--and it's good PR to get the courts on our side in at least one instance.
2. GET AN INJUCTION TO PREVENT THE GOV-ELECT FROM TAKING OFFICE. GO TO FEDERAL COURT. See above.
3. Get the White House and Justice Department involved. Dino Rossi won two of three counts. No one is objectively going to contend any bullying or undue influence is being exerted. Say this with me Bellevue ... HE WON THE COUNT AND THE RECOUNT. It will force the local media to cover it, which they are not doing. That in turn will put pressure on Gregoire, King County and the courts, all of whom are going to do everything they can to make this go away.
GET INTO THE GAME BELLEVUE. YOU'RE LOSING.
Mr Cynical makes some very interesting observations.
FlaRich doesn't know what he's talking about. That may have something to do with the fact he's from FLORIDA.. more Orange Juice less Kool Aid Rich. No real conservative outside Bellevue cares all that much what John Carlson thinks. He's a nice guy and informative on occasion, but very suspiciously 'moderate' and eastsideish... no offense brie and sturgeon people :)
JeffB some good points, especially about the P.O. Boxes.
Scott in Carnation a compelling argument for allowing absentee balloting, but you're in the vast minority of people who vote that way for a valid reason. It's too fraught with fraud Scott. I agree the voters pamphlets need to be specific to a locality... or more than one need to be sent out anyway. DennisW is right.
Richard is absolutely right, it's now or never.
More importantly, OrangeRobyn is right, this isn't about Dino Rossi. It's about not having shills from the same imprecise voracious entity who tallied votes in this election calculating my property tax liability or writing a budget.
My handle on Yahoo is 'seattlewag' if anyone wants to chat.
OK Jeff - then what makes you think the republicans did a better job in the guy they nominated for Gov?
Jim not sure what my choice of beverage has to do with all of this but feel free to point out any factual innaccuracies in my posts.
Hope to see you all Jan 12th when CG is sworn in as our new Gov.
Posted by: FlaRich on January 3, 2005 07:36 AMI would like to see the requirement that every county add to their websites the ability for me to bring up the EXACT ballot I will be casting so that I will know well in advance of the election exactly what I will be voting on.
Then, I will give up my absentee ballot.
Regardless, I doubt you will be able to get rid of absentees - there is a lot of pressure for us to do like Oregon and go all mail-in voting.
Posted by: Scott in Carnation on January 3, 2005 08:03 AMSo it wasn't legal malpractice so much as a colossal political miscalculation.
Those lines get blurred so it's difficult to know where to assess blame... but it has to go somewhere.
Are you affiliated with the party Scott?
I'm not actually sure where Carnation is, but it sounds Issaquish... is it close to Bellevue?
I'm not a politician. Truth is I tend to be a bit more confrontational and abrasive than is probably advisable for a decent human being.
I may be proven wrong if this bears out well, we'll see. But right now it looks to me like a good number of people in the R-party bent over and took everything Gregoire, the media and King County had to give.
Posted by: Jim on January 3, 2005 09:39 AMI listen to John daily - Kirby also, and don't find either to be "very suspiciously 'moderate' and eastsideish" as you claim. I'm NOT an eastsider - unles you consider Stanwood the eastside....
All this talk is just talk. MOST people on this thread have good ideas and true concerns. The fact is something needs to be done about all the problems NATIONALLY with voting and counting votes. I truly think what needs to be done is is to completely clear the voter roles and EVERYONE re register. We need to prove who we are when we register, AND when we vote. Absentee ballots should be for ONLY those who can't make it to the poles, not just because it's easier. An resident address is where you live, and I don't know of anyone that lives in a storage unit or a mailbox.....
This is the 21st Century, and voting needs to be brought up to the technology. In my part of Snohomish county, we voted using touch screens. Gotta say, they are so idiot-proof that only those in Florida could screw it up or be confused! All you need to be able to do is read and touch the screen! It's impossible to have a undervote or an overvote, or to vote for the wrong person. It asks you several times if you selected your right choices. NO hanging chads, NO marks to be "interpreted", NO problems. Only thing I'd like to see is a receipt for voting - and that is easy to set up in the computers.
This problem in KC has been going on for a long time - it's time to get it fixed - NOW! But it IS a state-wide problem. If someone was to check the roles - my wife and I reregistered in Stanwood when we moved here 3 years ago, and we informed Kitsap County we rhad moved. But we still show up on the Kitsap books! Sure, we COULD HAVE voted twice - but that's not right.
Gues I'm done rambling......
Posted by: Richman on January 3, 2005 10:28 AMI didn't think I really slammed John Carlson. Actually I said he was a nice guy who is informative and entertaining on occasion. I actually met him once and he was a gentleman.
He is however hooked in with that whole eastside crowd and carries the water for too many RINO's like Slade Gorton and Sam Reed.
Wilbur I don't have a high opinion of at all, unless he's changed. I taked to him on the phone twice when I was working in campaigns and he was a jerk both times. What do you think you're getting from a guy mentored by Mike Segiel?
Posted by: Jim on January 3, 2005 11:38 AMObviously you have a problem with conservatives that live on the Eastside - just because they live over there doesn't make them RINOs!
Look - We have a problem with election practices in this state. Whining about whether Slade and Sam are RINOs, or that John likes RINOs, or complaining about someone elses views are different than ours, will never get things fixed.
It doesn't really matter which party we're aligning ourselves with, or call ourselves Conservative, Liberal, a Constitutionialist, or whatever. All that believe in the laws - that each person is entitled to one vote. You must actually live where you vote, and must actually be alive.
Voting and counting votes isn't rocket science. You and your neighbor's vote. When that's done, the ballots are counted. If someone registers but doesn't vote - you have one less ballot than registered voter - NEVER more ballots than registered voters.
What is on the ballots shouldn't be open to interpretation. And IF a manual count is done, the workers should have only a red pencil with them - to record the count. PERIOD.
Heard a GREAT idea for recording the county totals with the state. When each County calls in to record, they say they're ready and then hang up. When ALL county's have called in, then the accessors office calls back for a total count. No-one knows what the counts for the other counties are until ALL have recorded.
If those in office won't fix it, then we replace them until we find a group that will work to ensure honest elections.
Posted by: Richman on January 3, 2005 06:34 PM