A couple of stories I've been pursuing are picking up traction in the big media.
Today's Seattle Times article "Official disputes gubernatorial vote-tally assertion"
David Irons, R-Sammamish, said yesterday that in the 2000 general election the discrepancy between the numbers of ballots cast and voters credited with voting was only 17 — far less than the 1,230-vote variance that election officials are citing.You read that here last Thursday. Dean Logan's explanation:
Logan said yesterday the number of voters listed as voting exceeded ballots by 3,067 in the 2001 general election and by 2,809 in 2002.You read that explanation here on January 13.He acknowledged, however, that discrepancies in 2000, 2001 and 2002 may have been inflated by the county's practice at the time of crediting absentee voters with having voted even if their ballots weren't counted because they were mailed too late or because of signature problems.
Another devastating charge by Councilmember Irons:
He also has requested — but has not received — records on the mailing of absentee ballots to overseas voters, including members of the armed forces....Among the documents Irons said Logan hasn't provided is a one-page log of mailings of absentee ballots that was provided to The Seattle Times several weeks ago.As I wrote on January 16th, King County Elections has never demonstrated that they mailed all of the military absentee ballots on time and that the Times article of January 13 did not settle the matter, in spite of its optimistic headline to the contrary. I'm not asserting that I know that the ballots were not mailed out on time, only that four months after the fact, the county is unable to provide the documentation that the ballots did go out on time. Stonewalling a County Councilmember is not going to help them make their case.
My condolences to anonymous lefty bloggers "Carla" and "Torrid Joe" ...
... who are deliriously proud of themselves for "Fisking Sharkansky". Unfortunately for them, among the goofy claims that they trot out to try to discredit me are that (1)
King's discrepancy [is not] out of order with their previously reported discrepancy in 2000and (2)
One of the main allegations perpetuated by Sound Politics is that King County disenfranchised voters by not mailing military ballots out on time. That allegation was soundly debunked earlier today.At least "Carla" and "Torrid Joe" have the consolation that nobody knows their real names.
UPDATE: "Torrid Joe" emailed me and reminded me that he had revealed his name to me in private correspondence a few weeks ago. Fair enough, he's not totally anonymous. I'll leave it up to him when and whether to share his real name with the general public. I welcome anybody who engages in a serious debate and discusses real issues. Hopefully, writing under his real name would inspire him to raise the bar and actually engage in serious debate and bring some new information to the table, instead of simply spouting the baseless nonsense that he currently trafficks in.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 09, 2005 12:47 AM | Email ThisThese people are used to the sheep dropping the issue after it leaves the headlines of one of the local silly papers, which 99 times out of 100, dismisses any question of a Democrat official as "unfounded." (If they can go on man-hating binge, they never refain from that ... usually in sort of extended "series").
Good job. We know where the real investigative reporting is happening and it's definitely not in the Tinker Times of Pathetic PI.
Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on February 9, 2005 01:50 AMHmm. Ok. But Torrid Joe's pretty smart. He laid out a entire analysis explaining himself. Why do you believe he is wrong other than being a dreaded dissenting troll?
Posted by: Erik on February 9, 2005 02:12 AMHe's going down sooner or later, which prompts me to ask:
1) Will Sims throw him to the wolves...how soon?
2) or Will Sims stand by him because he knows too much?
Posted by: JeanneB on February 9, 2005 03:55 AMErik,
Why don't you respond on the facts rather than hurling invectives. This site is open to freedom and open discourse. What is tiresome are the posts, like yours, that rely on cutting remarks rather than on the facts of the matter at hand. If you can dispute what Stefan has provided, great! If you can provide clarification, great, more power to you. But leave the insults and untruths at home.
Posted by: Zapporo on February 9, 2005 05:54 AMThe only invective and insults I see are the ones that you are tossing. That post makes you sound like a real dick. I looked through about 20 other posts by Erik and not one implied any sort of insult. You say this site is open to freedom and discourse before you excoriate someone for making a (arguably) sarcastic comment. This may be fine for a message board but your behavior is no credit to your party or even your own opinion.
PS: life-long conservative and Rossi voter. (before you launch in to me and accuse me of the New Deal and every american policy of detente)
Posted by: Rex on February 9, 2005 06:30 AMWhen you wrote that post, were you looking in the mirror? You signed the name Rex, but you seem like the Richard.
You may be a Rossi voter and life-long conservative - and you may be the type of person who gives the rest of us conservatives a bad name.
Erik is not a troll, but his forte is definately sarcasm and not fact. Seems you picked up on this yet ripped Zapporo anyway.
Stefan, keep up the great work. Full-court press with sideline traps.
Posted by: Larry on February 9, 2005 07:08 AMIf there are more votes than voters, whether it's 1 vote or 2000--there is NO confidence in the outcome of the election. PERIOD. No amount of Legalese is going to change that.
For every INVALID vote--a legitimate voter is disenfranchised. For every DEAD person voting, one legitimate person's vote is invalidated. That is NOT democracy.
For all of those 2000 some unaccounted ballots--there are 2000 some ACTUAL legitimate citizens that voted that got their votes invalidated.
When Berendt says, "This is how it's always been"--that's the lamest alibi ever, and is totally unacceptable.
The media and the Gregoire apologists are in the minority here--yet they control the press and the governor's mansion. THAT, is NOT democracy. That's a politburo.
Posted by: noel on February 9, 2005 07:56 AMRegards,
Philip Vago
Vago Corporation LLC
http://www.peterhawkes.com/Wine/wine.html
Distributing Flawless Boutique Australian Wine throughout Seattle.
From wikipedia:
Groupthink
Groupthink is a term coined by psychologist Irving Janis in 1972 to describe one process by which a group can make bad or irrational decisions. In a groupthink situation, each member of the group attempts to conform his or her opinions to what they believe to be the consensus of the group. This results in a situation in which the group ultimately agrees on an action which each member might normally consider to be unwise.
Janis listed eight symptoms that he said were indicative of groupthink:
1. Illusion of invulnerability
2. Unquestioned belief in the inherent morality of the group
3. Collective rationalization of group's decisions
4. Shared stereotypes of outgroup, particularly opponents
5. Self-censorship; members withhold criticisms
6. Illusion of unanimity (see false consensus effect)
7. Direct pressure on dissenters to conform
8. Self-appointed "mindguards" protect the group from negative information
what an incredibly insightful description of the average leftist!
Posted by: Richard Easbey on February 9, 2005 09:06 AMGreat point on Groupthink. I keep waiting for the first employee of King County Elections Commission who will come out and tell all. It would only take one person to speak out on all the shenanigans and machinations that were performed in order to make sure Gregoire won. Although, I'm not holding my breath.
Posted by: Larry on February 9, 2005 09:09 AMPR
Posted by: PR on February 9, 2005 09:35 AMWhere's the outrage ? Sims should probably be recalled for his ineptness, pi** poor judgment and coverup here along with everything else he has tried to cover up (i.e. Sound Transit and the CAO). The Democrat machine sounded off and prefers to ignore the problem, which cannot stand to be ignored. Why do residents of King County let these problems fester into a full-blown cancer ? Hopefully there will arise a formidable candidate to oppose this guy who is running King County into the ground !
Posted by: KS on February 9, 2005 11:15 AMIt just struck me a oddly misplaced, in a funny sort of way :-)
Posted by: Jason on February 9, 2005 11:26 AMYou can bet your bottom dollar that Gregoire would have contested this election if she had lost the hand recount. The fact is that we were destined to be in this position due to the incompetence, if not outright fraud, within King County Elections Commission.
Certainly all of here would rather have Dino in the Governor's mansion while Gregoire contested. But I'd rather be going into the contest with a two-time winner than a three-time loser (as Gregoire would have been.)
Posted by: Larry on February 9, 2005 11:29 AMThanks for standing up to a dissenter. You get one free pass to dissent from a blog of a different political persuasion than yours.
Posted by Alan in Las Vegas at February 9, 2005 08:58 AM :
Groupthink is a term coined by psychologist Irving Janis in 1972 to describe one process by which a group can make bad or irrational decisions.
Right on. That should be posted in every group discussion.
Its unavoidable though Allen to some extent. I don't think SP is guilty of it any more than other groups though. Try attending a "diversity class" and see it in action there.
The striking issue for me always was when someone switches sides from one politcal party to another, they don't typically change just one political view, but about a half dozen even if they are unrelated. There are some variations, but political identities usually come in a package.
Lucy, torridjoe et.al. have the same problem with their arguments that King County elections has with counting the votes. They cannot fully reconcile them
Cool. A substantive response to my post.
Posted by: Erik on February 9, 2005 11:54 AM...to your (repetitious) posts?
None of the problems discussed here were known about when DR won the machine recount. The problems emerged during the course of the hand "recount" (which, of course, wasn't a recount at all, given the thousands of ballots "discovered" and counted during the "recount"), and were discussed here as the facts emerged.
I would certainly have been delighted to have seen CG lose the hand "recount", but I am also aware that the knife cuts both ways, and I would have been just as insistent that numerous flaws in the process be addressed (by revote) if DR had won, because an honest process is the only way that I can tolerate a hack like CG in office.
No doubt you would have similar sentiments if the situation was reversed, which is why I would sincerely hope that we can agree on the supreme importance of ensuring the integrity of the electoral process, even as we agree to disagree on the merits of the candidates.
Posted by: ewaggin on February 9, 2005 12:06 PMNew laws by any sworn in government should aid people dealing in the wine business with less taxes and an overhaul of the procedures involved in processing licenses, labels and pricing.
Phillip. Your post pains me to understand. Are you trying to advertise your wine business? If so, that's almost as bad as dissenting here.
Posted by: Erik on February 9, 2005 12:12 PMThere is one other difference between Chris & Dino. I whole heartedly believe that if the roles had been reversed completely...(Gregoire wins the 1st two counts, and Dino wins the 3rd count). And the same *cloud* resided over this whole thing, Dino would have still asked the legislature to nullify (not certify) the election and would have requested a new gubernatorial election.
And oh by the way this isn't *just* about winning for anyone on this post or other blogs, it's about the will of the people being represented in public offices, and if it isn't then everyone (here and over there) should check that attitude at the blogosphere gateway before they enter.
Cid
This is not about winning, it's about condeming an obviously flawed election process.
Posted by: Jeff B. on February 9, 2005 01:10 PMSure... I guess that's why entire Wa. Repub Committee invoked "for the good of the state" mantra asking CG to step aside.
Posted by: JDM on February 9, 2005 04:35 PMI have been looking for anything posted - that would substantiate King Countys claims that the military ballots were indeed mailed out within the Federally appointed deadline - but could find nothing other than unnamed sources assurances...
Nothing to support an audit trail..nothing more than hand written log entries....
They have some 'eplaining to do...
Posted by: Deborah on February 9, 2005 04:38 PMliberal and progressive are from the same ilk, bastard children of markism.
Posted by: ray on February 9, 2005 07:19 PMYour differentiation between "liberal" and "progressive" hits one snag:
The Dems have historically proven to be both.
There is not one significant piece of legislation enacted by the Democrats that has not either made it harder to get off welfare or made it harder to stay in business.
It's all in the semantics. And you guys accuse the Republicans of using code words...
Posted by: ERNurse on February 10, 2005 12:07 AMNot one piece of legislation from the Democrats has EVER been ameliorative OR in the best interest of the individual citizen without a HUGE price to be paid in the long run.
Expedient, yes. Cynical, yes. Healthy, no.
Don't bother with the New Deal schtick You guys damned Roosevelt for a traitor to the party decades ago.
Pull your nose out of the MoveOn script.
What happens next? Maybe they keep offering well-written posts based on solid research, and you start yelling about whose mama wears combat boots...?
Posted by: Tom Carter on February 10, 2005 01:55 AMWhat's your point other than you wish to parrot what you learned today in your Psych 101 class?
The existence of Lemmings (academically referred to as groupthink participants) have been recognized since before the Romans.
Posted by: Michael on February 10, 2005 08:42 AMAs an independent voter, I certainly care about the irregularities regardless of who is in the lead.
The facts are that democrats did not raise irregularities as an issue when Rossi was ahead. Instead they created irregularities.
Secondly, Rossi was visibly disturbed by what he called a 'new election' during the first and second recounts, meaning there were new votes found. The recount was not necessarily confined to recounting, it was indeed recavassing and adding new previously uncounted votes.
During the 'new election' (erroneously aka recount) the existence of irregularities surfaced especially as we witnessed democrat activist supporters going door-to-door getting 'affidavits' of voters whose signature was missing or unmatched, AND AT THE SAME TIME telling Rossi voters 'Have a Nice Day' without following up with problems in their registration. Juxtaposed against all this was Gregoire and her party saying 'Count Every Vote'. This is surreal to say the least.
If it had been Rossi doing what Gregoire and her party did, I and I know my friends and colleagues would be screaming DINO YOU ARE WRONG! But it is not Dino Rossi and his party that are pulling these stunts, it is Gregoire and so we are saying to her and her party, GREGOIRE YOU ARE ILLEGITIMATE!
It has nothing to do with party affiliation. It has everything to do with integrity PERIOD.
Posted by: Michael on February 10, 2005 08:57 AM