Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters Conny McCormack thinks King County "displayed amazing accuracy" in the 2004 election
McCormack said she was impressed with King County's inaccuracy rate of only 0.2 percent. "We've never hit 0.2 of a percent (in Los Angeles County). I think that is excellent," she added. Los Angeles County's error rate in its voter-crediting process for the 2004 election was about 1 percent of its 3.1 million votes.Yikes. And we all thought that 0.2% was bad. As I discovered the other day, if SeaTac airport had an error rate of 0.2%, it would mean 2 airplane crashes a day. But if LAX had an error rate of 1%, it would mean a crash every 80 minutes!
Not on my tax dollar. I want clean elections. As a computer professional that would lose his job if hackers were able to breach a network at even a .01% per ecommerce transaction rate, I'm not impressed with LA County or King County.
Clean it up and do it right. Until heads roll and we've got a result that is accurate, I won't rest.
Posted by: Jeff B. on February 18, 2005 01:16 AMYou were awfully eager to quote Bob Bruce when he said the 2000 discrepancy was under 20, but now that he's clarified that we're talking about two different numbers, I don't see you mentioning him at all. And Sam Reed even says that the voter-credit variance is so irrelevant that most counties don't even bother calculating it.
Well, maybe you can get some one-on-one time with Dean Logan tomorrow, and he can better explain it to you.
Posted by: David Goldstein on February 18, 2005 02:36 AMIt’s not difficult to understand, and that isn’t his point. He simply doesn’t want to acknowledge the obvious. It’s a common tactic; wave off the big issues, ignore what he can, and attempt to reduce the argument down to incidentals. Conservatives and Rossi supporters want a fair outcome, and to have real reform to see that this doesn’t happen again. For David and others, it’s only about winning this time, and to insure having the same doors of obfuscation and incompetence open during the next cycle.
It’s a case of two completely separate sets of priorities, ethics, and morality. The office is about the only common denominator. There isn’t even a significant commonality in the use of the English language.
Really??
Then how come Jefferson County was able to do it?
18,772 votes and 18,772 voters.
100%!!
And why do they reconcile every time??
Other Counties are very close.
Goldy misquoted Spokane COunty as being off thousands!! to build his case for justifying KingCo's sloppiness.
Then BAMMMMM!
Spokane County is off by only 77!
Bad try Goldy---No Sale!!
Posted by: Mr. Cyncial on February 18, 2005 06:45 AMI saw a Bank of America commercial that mentioned check processing. It said that the goal wasn't to process 11 million checks. The goal is to process one check properly, and repeat the process 11 million times. What say you, Ron Sims?
Posted by: Lawrence on February 18, 2005 07:15 AMHillary is in support of a Congressional bill that lets all felons vote.
It's gone beyond the passive backroom tacit receipt of the benefit of these votes. Now through rhetoric and legislative action, they wish to codify these benefits. Guess the only thing left for them is to ban, on a national basis, the voting by people who hold certainl religious beliefs.
All in defense of the self perpetuating power structure they have built.
Posted by: Patches Pal on February 18, 2005 07:53 AMI understand the distinction they're making. They're saying the count was wonderfully, magically accurate; it's merely their record-keeping process that's characterized by grotesque incompetence.
But they never do explain how the inaccuracy of the election records is irrelevant to possible inaccuracy of the count. They merely assert it, and it is an assertion which I think any reasonable and honest person would have to question.
Vance is right: If they cannot produce a reasonably accurate list of the people who voted, how can they possibly defend the accuracy of the count? I'd really be interested in hearing an "explanation" of that one, David.
Do you really not understand that the whole point of requring voters to sign either the poll book or the ballot envelope is to help ensure an accurate count?
But somehow, even though the number of signatures and the number of ballots show a gross discrepancy, anyone who questions the accuracy of the count is just being ridiculous?
Posted by: ScottM on February 18, 2005 08:00 AMBut of course, the discrepancy has nothing to do with the accuracy of the count, nosirreebob!
Posted by: ScottM on February 18, 2005 08:13 AMThanks for reminding me again, Ken! Now, if only the lawmakers here weren't so hell-bent on copying every bad idea your lawmakers churn out....
Posted by: Scott on February 18, 2005 08:27 AMWhat I wonder about is who mailed the registrations in? Did the kids or felons, or did the kids hand the forms over to someone? Who were the absentee ballots mailed to? The prisoners themselves or someone else?
I think I could live with felons voting (where legal), but I don't think that's what is really going on.
SporkLift Driver.
Posted by: SporkLift Driver on February 18, 2005 08:40 AMQUOTE===Applicants who do not have either can provide the last four digits of their Social Security number===UNQUOTE
LMAO-- AND WHAT "DOCUMENTS"?????
Is identification required to register? ...top
The Help America Vote Act (HAVA), enacted by Congress in October of 2002, states that individuals registering to vote for the first time in the state/jurisdiction, must provide either a valid California driver's license or state ID card number. Applicants who do not have either can provide the last four digits of their Social Security number. If the voter provides a driver’s license or state ID number when he/she registers to vote, and the number can be matched to a state record, then the voter will not be required to show ID when he/she votes.
Otherwise…
If an individual registers by mail, has not previously voted in an election for federal office, and votes in person, the voter must show photo ID or a document that indicates both the voter's name and residence address.
If an individual registers by mail, has not previously voted in an election for federal office, and votes by mail, the voter must submit a copy of a photo ID or a document with both the voter's name and residence address.
Trust is earned, and they have not earned my trust. They have lost what little they had.
The more public relations press conferences these "election professionals" have, the less I am inclined to believe them. They seem too frantic in their desire to make us believers.
Imagine the chaos that would exist in our society if other agencys worked this way:
Airports: already established, we'd have daily crashes at every major airport
Banks: Thought you budgeted enough to pay all your bills? Oops, sorry, the bank misplaced 1% of your paycheck.
Hospitals: They really wanted to give you the right medicine to save your life, but they were off by a bit, sorry, but hey, you can probably still vote.
There are many far more complex systems in our daily lives than elections, all of which perform at a much higher level of precision than our current elections sytems, so why is it so hard to get elections right?
Posted by: Jason on February 18, 2005 08:45 AMAnd that idiot Vance, "(officials) are just trying to create as much confusion and smoke and mirrors and jargon and gobbledygook as possible." Which is exactly what Vance is doing in a statement that means nothing and is full of non-sense words. Who is he fooling?
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 08:59 AMHas Sims/Logan fully explained how they compare apples to apples, and/or oranges to oranges in their voters/ballots reconciliation process?
Is this where they say, "Oh well, close enough for government work."
They did what was necessary to steal the election. Our MSM has given them the free pass then need. Were it not for this blog and others like it, this would have passed under the radar long ago.
It's funny how some people think that saying something can make it so, like your comment about the lawsuit being dead in the water. What is that based on?
I could easily say something like, Doc is trolling moron who doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about. Does that make it so? Oh wait, I at least have your own posts to point to as evidence, what do you have?
Posted by: Jason on February 18, 2005 09:16 AMStefan's point is simply that accuracy matters and Goldstein immediately spins it in with Modie's article to try and explain the errors into different Democrat tolerated and justified categoires.
Wake up David. It's about the accuracy. No one in this state with a shred of integrity has any trust in the accuracy of this outcome. And no one here with any common sense is willing to accept that this is just what happened, no one meant any harm, the three counts are over so let's just pack up and go home. Even if the election contest fails, this is all about reform that will assure that ACCURACY (there's that word again) matters in future elections.
What's particularly galling is that not only do hard core Dems want this over to keep Gregoire in office, but they are unwilling to pass meaningful reforms to assure better results in the future.
If you don't understand why that's offensive to the vast majority of Washingtonions with a shred of integrity, than you are worse than I thought.
Posted by: Jeff B. on February 18, 2005 09:20 AMLets dig deeper into the coming and going of Gregoire as AG. More secret meetings and schedules not revealed.
Posted by: chardonnay on February 18, 2005 09:27 AMHave any evidence or links of the 'expert opinion'? And please don't write that you are the expert - we've read your posts.
Posted by: Larry on February 18, 2005 09:33 AMEveryone's a damn expert.
There isn't any faith in this state's democracy because there isn't a fair democracy in this state.
This Blog did NOT create the loss of faith, we found this blog because our faith was lost by a bunch a crazed criminals who resort to fraud to steal elections.
When elections arn't fair, honest, and transparant the system creates distrust and a loss of faith.
WHAT THE HELL ARE THE DEMOCRATS TRYING TO HIDE AND COVERUP BY ALL OF THE WAGON DRILLS????
Why did the King County Elections Board REQUEST the LA County Auditor to have news conference?????
Have a Great corrupt Day!
Dana
Sorry, dude, the world is full of self-proclaimed experts whose opinions are worth just what you paid for them.
In this case, Judge Bridges' opinion is the only one worth counting, and you just might have noticed he didn't follow the Democrats expert opinion that the case be thrown out of court.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on February 18, 2005 09:39 AM"What do I have? Expert opinion that says the lawsuit is frivolous."
The experts seem to disagree. Isn't this why the issue is in court, and a judge will make a ruling?
"What do you have? An over zealous blogger manufacturing election atrocities that truly help destroy this states faith in democracy."
No, my faith in our state's democracy was destroyed by the obvious mismangement of our election. But if you are happy with how things turned out, you should have no worries (kinda like Alfred E. Newman).
The process has been COMPLETELY transparent and this transparency is the only reason the data has been available to manufacture discrepancies.
You need a link to an expert? The post these comments are attached to should be enough.
Remember the Registrar position is non-partisan.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 09:48 AMNo, the "experts" behind the lawsuit are only expert (not so expert since they lost) in winning elections, not on the election process.
It's time to heal, not divide.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 09:53 AMYou don't have an expert so just admit it. You are an expert troller though! You are on a conservative blog site trying to agitate and stir up trouble.
There is nothing transparant about finding "new" ballots 9 NINE times in King County.
Their registrar isn't non-partisian either.
Try presenting some facts or go find a left liberal elitist blog to post on, otherwise
expect to be attacked on your positions or lack thereof.
What is transparent is the lack of KC owning up to it's "MISTAKES". Not the "Oops We Farted" kind of MISTAKES, I am talking about how can a Voter Vote if Voter didnt SIGN SOMETHING. I dont buy your Election VS Reconciliation Explanation. It seems to me, you need a VOTER before you COUNT his/her BALLOT.....DUH!!!!
Posted by: Chris on February 18, 2005 09:59 AMHas Stefan done that? You be the judge.
Here's what republican SOS Sam Reed thinks of Stefan's basless rants:
Moderator: Anything, Sam, you want so say that you haven’t had a chance to address? Any urban myths?
Reed: Actually, there is, you are right. A frustration of mine as a person with considerable experience in the field of elections is that some of the rumors of errors, mistakes, illegalities, were absolutely incorrect, but because of the Internet, blogs and talk radio, they were circulated rapidly and extensively and helped contribute to the loss of confidence and trust in the system. I would hope in the future that the people who operate these blogs and the talk radio hosts will exercise the caution and ethics of the journalism profession, and that will help the citizery understand what really happened in the election process.
The only thing that would make Goldstein's whole pathetic effort even more funny is if it turned out his key number-crunchers were actually government employees blogging while at work!!!
How would folks feel about that I ask????
What is HERE, is what the government officials DON'T want you to know. They have great trust in the their assumptions that the public is TOO STUPID to find out the truth!
Republicans are trying to dismiss votes based on technicalities, something that should have been done BEFORE the vote.
Quit putting the cart before the horse.
And what Eric said.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 10:11 AMAdditionally the comment of "republican SoS" just shows the lack of understanding that we are looking for truth, not party affiliation. That lack of understanding of that little fact does not bode well for the democrats that apparently are more interested in party affiliation before facts.
Posted by: Jonathan on February 18, 2005 10:18 AMSince there are more votes than voters in KC, can you explain where they came from? If the voters only voted once, then who cast the extra votes? Do you have a crystal ball?
What about the confirmed dead "voters"? Can you explain their ability to ignore the natural laws and perform this otherwise impossible task?
Posted by: dragon on February 18, 2005 10:18 AMHow can you dismiss someone who votes who is not legally registered?
How can you dismiss someone who votes absentee from Reno, Nevada and votes at the polls in King County too?
Don't worry! This problem will resolve itself in the courts and in the next election. I am going to work very hard to get these corrupt thugs out of office in 2006 and 2008!
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 10:18 AMLiars and Damn Liars.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 10:18 AMWe are talking less then one vote per precinct in KC!
How can the election board prevent grieving spouses from submitting absentee ballots? And is it really such a big deal?
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 10:23 AMWhat has happened since is smoke and mirrors.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 10:26 AMThere are 580 precincts in KC! She won by 129?
You tell me, is the margin of error greater than the margin of win?
Simple math!
No-one knows who won because of the fraud and errors......
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 10:28 AMExactly, Shark. If you dive into the elections world beyond King County, you will find that election accuracy here is pretty good compared to many other places. Does that mean it is good enough? No. Does it mean election reform is not necessary? No - it obviously is. But what it does mean is your shock and awe about King County alone, when put in this larger context, should be tempered by the greater realities of the system.
Posted by: Daniel K on February 18, 2005 10:28 AMThey are used as a baseline for discussion where one would expect some additional information to show why there is an error in the analysis. Name calling is not a rebuttal, other than, I guess, gosh you are right but we don't like that result so we will get personal and call you names. Very mature, not to mention convincing.
Posted by: Jonathan on February 18, 2005 10:29 AMHow do you know they didn't?
"We are talking less then one vote per precinct in KC!"
Are there more than 129 precincts in KC?
"How can the election board prevent grieving spouses from submitting absentee ballots?"
By checking the readily avalilable lists of people that die, (hint, they are called obituaries).
"And is it really such a big deal?"
By that logic, can we assume you are not concerned about whether your bank follows the laws governing balancing your accounts?
There's compassion for you.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 10:30 AM
I was told by my local neighborhood anti-war activist that it's my responsibility to question my government...he wasn't lying, was he?
So, are you saying you are OK with the illegal votes being counted?
In that case, would you mind if I vote about , oh, say, 3000 times in teh next election? Can anybody do that? Are you OK with that?
Posted by: dragon on February 18, 2005 10:35 AMThe old man who voted for his wife filled out her ballot, forged her signature, and cast her illegal vote for Dino Rossi!
I voted Dino Rossi and her vote for Dino Rossi was still illegal and still morally wrong. He knew it and he accepted the consequences of that decision! The KC election officials should have caught the sighature discrapancy and tossed the ballot out! Unless of course, he had been voting for her for a long time and it's really his signature on her voter registration!
Correct procedures would have stopped this from happening!
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 10:35 AMOr the last wish to be buried in a Rolls Royce, so rob a abnk to get the money and bury him in there. We shouldn't throw the person in jail because that wouldn't be compassionate. Give me a 1,000 breaks! Saying it is OK to illegally sway an election, the core of this democracy, is just fine.
Posted by: Jonathan on February 18, 2005 10:36 AMOh man Jason, you soooo don't want to go there!
Posted by: Daniel K on February 18, 2005 10:36 AMThat is compassion. The same compassion that drives the taxpayers/LEGAL VOTERS to EXPECT an honest accounting of their ballots.
Do you expect less???? Obivious you do, as you condone the actions of KC and their pitiful excuses.
Carry on Stefan, you are doing a wonderful job of keeping the PUBLIC informed of what REALLY happens in this STATE.
Posted by: Chris on February 18, 2005 10:37 AMBanks are not elections.
Airports are not elections.
Banks are not airports.
Anybody see a pattern?
And Rossi hasn't been hobnobbing with Republican leaders in D.C.?
Posted by: Daniel K on February 18, 2005 10:39 AMBut incompetence is still incompetence.
Posted by: dragon on February 18, 2005 10:40 AMThank God, I would have to store my money in a can in the back yard, and only travel by car or bus, with the ERROR RATE of the Last Election...
Good point DOC!!!!
Point???? Rossi is a Citizen, not a public official, we dont pay his bills.....
Posted by: chris on February 18, 2005 10:44 AMOut of curiousity, do you feel that Bush was fairly elected in 2000? If you are "relying on one single fact: the number of votes cast and the amount received by each party." you must agree that Bush won in 2000.
Posted by: Jonathan on February 18, 2005 10:49 AMWe also know election officials are not given the resources to check every voter and rely on citizen honesty. Perhaps this should be changed. Elections should certainly be reformed.
But to claim democracy is a farce because a few recently deceased citizens ballots slipped through is just indecent.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 10:50 AMThis blog should be about election reform. We can all agree that something needs to be done.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 10:54 AMWe also know election officials are not given the resources to check every voter and rely on citizen honesty. Perhaps this should be changed. Elections should certainly be reformed.
But to claim democracy is a farce because a few recently deceased citizens ballots slipped through is just indecent. "
I don't recall anybody saying the election is a farce because "a few recently deceased citizens ballots slipped through"
This is just a very small portion of the incompetence. The large picture is the cumulative effect of the incompetnce of the elections officials. BTW, If a citizen votes absentee, sends their ballot in, then passes on, their vote is deemed valid. Those that die many months before the absentee ballots are even sent out, and yet manage to vote that are part of the problem. Also, I see you have continued to conveniently ignore the fact that more votes were cast than "voters who voted".
Can't come up with a zinger for that one, can you.
It is indecent that that election officials won't tell the truth. They are trying hard to hide it. It is indecent that the left leaning news media doesn't report the truth. It is also indecent to blame citizens and bloggers for government officials errors and mistakes. They need to stand up, tell the truth and take RESPONSIBILITY for it. Dean Logan is blaming the mistakes on his staff...... That is NOT a leader, it is a weasel!
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 10:59 AMVotes are not money, not yet.
This continual comparison is smoke and mirrors and does everybody a disservice.
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 11:02 AMBut the result of the votes does dictate who controls a very large sum of our money, coes it not?
Posted by: dragon on February 18, 2005 11:03 AMRight, and ongoing WSP security for Rossi only recently discontinued didn't really cost us $35,000 (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002182276_rossi17m.html)?
Posted by: Daniel K on February 18, 2005 11:05 AMThe fact that there are more votes then voters who voted is an accounting problem. Certainly there are more voters then votes.
What is done in an election is count votes.
The democratic mantra of "Count every vote" put us in this spend spend spend State of Washington!
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 11:10 AMRight, and ongoing WSP security for Rossi only recently discontinued didn't really cost us $35,000 (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002182276_rossi17m.html)?
Posted by Daniel K at February 18, 2005 11:05 AM
Riiiighhhtttt. And Gregoire didn't really miss those deadlines and cost the taxpayers how many millions of dollars?
Ass you said in a previous post, DanielK:
"you soooo don't want to go there!"
And just what is Logan hiding?
Do you really believe there was fraud?
I love it! The people that run the system are blaming the system as if it is another entity! If they can not control the system they are in charge of operating GET THEM OUT!
Posted by: Jonathan on February 18, 2005 11:16 AMPlus you must grant me the system is non-partisan (remember Rossi had the lead twice).
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 11:22 AMYES, I personally believe there is fraud. Whether or not is was deliberate is another matter. Furthermore, whether or not those in charge knew it was happening or not is also another matter. When you are partisian, and in a leadership position and only care that your guy is winning and you keep finding new ballots, you are probably not seeing the truth. When you turn your head the other way and ignore complaints because your guy is ahead, it is complicitly allowing fraud.
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 11:22 AMIn regards to President Bush, don't go there!
I'm a Republican, I voted for him, I am a retired Army SGM who served in two combat zones......... and was upset that I didn't get to go to Iraq because I was retiring......
Do I need to say more?
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 11:24 AMAnd don't look for L.A, to improve their error rate anytime soon. It would hurt the democrats
Posted by: Michele S on February 18, 2005 11:25 AMI'd like you to say more about your unwillingness to invest in your community...
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 11:28 AM"Banks are not elections.
Airports are not elections.
Banks are not airports.
Anybody see a pattern?"
Yes, Doc, I do see a pattern - 'rats are not to be trusted with the really important stuff!
Posted by: Not Erik on February 18, 2005 11:29 AMI think it's called waste, fraud and abuse. If a poor demented soul thinks he needs to become a woman, let him pay for it. I don't want to pay for it.
Our government officials have been getting away with spending our money, corrupting our political and election systems for far too long.
If you want dead illegal alien felons voting, stand up and say so. If you want people to vote in two states or two counties, stand up a say so. If you want me to register my pet bird to vote by mail, receive an absentee ballot that I fill out for him, stand up say so!
Every breathing American citizen living in Washington State deserves ONE votej in Washington State.
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 11:34 AMBut I need to ask myself,and you, why does she keep magazines laying all around her office with Rudy Guliani on the cover? That just doesn't make sense, oh wait, he is a truly great leader.
Is this what she aspires to be? To bad it won't be here in Washington, lol, if this is her goal, why is she in hiding? LOL, LOL
ya, great leaders run and hide, duck and cover. what a fake.....I mean FRAUDOIRE.
Recognize his tripe for what it is. As for LA, go soak your head.
Posted by: dkpcowboy on February 18, 2005 11:41 AM
Sgmmac, I'm with you. There is far too much waste, far too much money handed out for no good reason. But this is done on both sides of the aisle. We need to look at corporate welfare as well as welfare itself.
And I do want the voting system corrected. But the errors ion the system favored no party ... there was bound to be a winner and a loser.
DINO ROSSI FOR GOVERNOR
www.dinorossi.com
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Mary Lane
Feb. 18, 2005 (425) 646-7202
Another win on election contest
Another loss for Democrats, Gregoire
Bellevue, WA – Today in Chelan County Superior Court the judge in the gubernatorial election contest handed the Rossi campaign another victory, and the Democrats and Christine Gregoire another setback.
The judge signed the Rossi campaign’s proposed order which summarized the judge’s rulings from the last hearing on Feb. 4. The Rossi campaign offered a straightforward summary of the judge’s rulings, while the Democratic Party attempted to substantially change what the judge actually said two weeks ago.
“Christine Gregoire and the Democrats keep trying to delay and to limit our ability to move forward with this election contest, and they keep failing,” said Rossi spokeswoman Mary Lane.
“We are very happy with the judge’s ruling and we look forward to getting the contest to trial so we can get to the bottom of this flawed election.”
###
Congratulations. You've honed in on the one part of that article that doesn't really matter to the subject at hand. What you should have posted was this part:
"But Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters Conny McCormack also thinks it’s irrelevant.
While King County officials defend the process in question as highly accurate and GOP critics call it shockingly inaccurate, McCormack said it’s a red herring, a flap over a postelection file-maintenance chore that has no bearing on the accuracy of the election returns.
“It has nothing to do with the ballot-counting. It’s a separate process,” she said this week."
Yes, that's right. It's a *red herring*. You insist on comparing the number of voters with a post election process that was never designed or intended to give an accurate number, but instead used to give voter information to parties and help with standard statistical information about the voter rolls. Some day you may finally get this, until you do, perhaps you could save yourself some angst and just give it up.
Posted by: Chris Mahnken on February 18, 2005 11:48 AMLet me explain. If (IF) you accept that there is 100% reconciliation between voters and ballots at each precinct, then that means that every ballot had a voter and every voter had a ballot per precinct.
Then, during the voter creditation process if you find 1800 more votes than voters who voted, that implies that 1800 people must have voted twice (or 900 people voted 3 times, or some combination), but at different precincts each time.
If there was “error” at the precinct level, you can attribute the 1800 to the accumulation of errors. Claiming no error at the precinct level but finding error during the creditation process necessarily implies double voting, at two different precincts.
(The only other explanation is the reconciliation is so flawed, however, if flawed, reconciliation should be able to be redone correctly.)
For the record, I doubt the precincts were 100% reconciled.
Posted by: VaCSProf on February 18, 2005 11:48 AMBut let's fix it!
Posted by: Doc on February 18, 2005 12:03 PMawesome news, thank you. time to party!!!
Posted by: chardonnay on February 18, 2005 12:03 PMIf you are referring to FL 2000 as breaking to the right, I haven't heard of one count before, during, or after that in anyway changed the election. FL went by their laws, and we are following ours.
Posted by: Jonathan on February 18, 2005 12:11 PMWA law or the constitution (I'm not sure where it is, but I'm sure someone on here does) allows for the election to be set aside for various reasons. As a path to that outcome has been laid, we can follow it and ensure a valid outcome in which the citizens have confidence.
Posted by: Jonathan on February 18, 2005 12:22 PMdkpcowboy is right. Doc is just baiting people.
Doc's one-liners:
How is it fraud if it is unintentional?
Nobody is hiding a thing.
It's time to heal, not divide.
Republicans are trying to dismiss votes based on technicalities.
Gregoire is a little too republican.
The real reason he wants us to quit talking about this election contest: Bush won!
I have probably taken everything out of context, but I watched too much Dan Rather in my hippie years. Everyone has an excuse. King County officials have more than one.
If you take into account the enhanced ballots and other known irregularities it comes out to over 9700. This is without taking into account democrat staffers voting for those who forgot to vote and their defying the judge's order and only gathering signatures for one side.
I bet it would get over 10000 towards Rossi if the rest of the irregularities had been cleaned up, the laws had been followed, and a valid ID was required. I'm thinking more likely about 15000 towards Rossi.
Each time I run the numbers, see the statistics, and investigate the facts I find an overwhelming understanding of how bad we have been sc++wed in the voting of the past. Doesn't this really rile anyone besides me. Doesn't it peeve off the liberal mouthpieces that we finally found out. They worry about Florida and Ohio while others worry about Minnesota, Washington, and now California. Clean up the elections and lets see what the tallies really are.
Judging from the investigations in Ohio and Florida we know the results for Florida actually were better for the conservatives (1500 towards Bush) and there was little change in the Ohio statewide results. I think what would be an eye opener is the changes here in Washington state and Minnesota Metropolitan area results. How about the changes you can expect in California without the illegal votes. No wonder the Ds fight meaningful election reform.
That's just it, Stefan. We'll leave aside the question of whether or not this count is a *red herring* or not, because NOT everyone thinks that 0.2% is such a bad number.
Could it be better? Perhaps... But we're talking about an election that is run in thousands of precincts with thousands of relatively untrained poll volunteer (many of whom are senior citizens and/or relatively uneducated formally).
A few legislative fixes or a citizen's initiative aren't going to change that to 100%. We would need to consider far more extreme ideas like an all-mail ballot election or moving elections to a weekend or national holiday to allow for more highly educated and better-trained workers.
And, by the way, let's stop trying to compare maintaining the safety of airplanes in the air to counting pieces of paper. Although, for the record, banks have nowhere near 100% accuracy. Just ask anyone who works as a teller.
Posted by: Michael on February 18, 2005 02:53 PMI agree....KC OUT unil you get it right.
Posted by: Chris on February 18, 2005 03:54 PMCould you please list those counties that the elite King County supports?
those counties would live in peace, without "KING county" shoving all it's Lefty ideas of land grabbing.
Posted by: Chris on February 18, 2005 09:16 PM