Last Friday I posted the Republicans' Trial Brief, which summarizes their case for setting aside the election.
Today I found the Democrats' Trial Brief, which summarizes their case for keeping Gregoire in office. They offer two alternative arguments.
The first (I paraphrase):
Yes, there may have been ballots cast in the names of dead people and unverified provisionals shoved into AccuVotes and more absentee ballots counted than there were voters, but unless the challenger can prove exactly who cast the bogus ballots and for whom they were cast, they should be treated as legal votesOn the off-chance the judge rejects that first argument, the Democrats argue in the alternative that (I paraphrase)
the election is even more f*cked up then the Republicans claim and therefore Gregoire is the legitimate winnerThe Democrats are asking for summary judgment after the Republicans finish presenting their case on Friday and have proposed this Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law for Judge Bridges to sign. One quote seems to sum up the Democrats attitude toward the electoral process (p. 17, exact words)
the Court finds that such a [unverified provisional] ballot [that went into an Accuvote] is, as a practical matter, the same as a lawful vote and had no effect on the outcome of the race.It's just like a Democrat to believe that a lawful vote should have no effect on the outcome of a race. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at May 25, 2005 12:24 AM | Email This
Isn't it interesting that soon-to-be-ex-governor Chrissy is heading off on a "trade mission" to Europe just AFTER her daughter graduates from law school.
That just begs a couple of big questions:
1. Are the taxpayers providing Courtney with a grand graduation trip?
2. Is mommy dearest rushing to get in a free trip before the court case is concluded, just in case?
And she wonders why her popularity rating is in the toilet and 75% respondents in the KIRO poll are calling for a REVOTE... she doesn't even attempt to hide the fact that she thinks citizens are stupid or that she holds them in contempt.
Hey, soon-to-be-ex-governor Chrissy, the feeling is mutual, sweetie.
Therefore, they are just throwing anything at the wall they can, desperately hoping that something will stick and there won't be a revote. They aren't worried (though they should be) about a revolt from the voters.
If Chrissy would've joined with Rossi in calling for a revote, she might have won based on her magnanimous gesture. Now she and her minions just seem petulant and petty (they seem that way because they are that way).
Posted by: Danny on May 25, 2005 06:59 AMAs a PRACTICAL matter, the judge should nullify the election because of more than 1,000 more ballots than voters. To say that these should be ignored because no one can show who cast them or for whom they were cast is an open invitation for more voting fraud.
Also, the Dems were making a great case for splitting King County because it was too large to avoid significant errors and mistakes in administration of the public trust.
Posted by: Jack on May 25, 2005 08:02 AMwww.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com
Posted by: starboardhelm on May 25, 2005 09:17 AM