This week's issue of the Seattle Weekly carries a ringing endorsement of vote fraud by Geov Parrish in Trial of the Century:
That's how Christine Gregoire became governor after the third counting, and that's where matters should have rested. All elections are imperfect. The winner is the person for whom the most votes are counted—not cast. The goal of beleaguered elections officials is to try to get the votes cast to match the votes counted, but when the difference is greater than the margin of victory, it's the tally that matters.(Hat tip: SP commentor Mark D.)
See? It doesn't matter what the voters want, only what the bureaucrats count. We should just drop our impossibly high standards and give "beleaguered" counters a break.
By Parrish's standard, even the most blatant fraud could be excused. Dead people voted? People voted twice? More ballots than voters? No problem -- they were counted, therefore they were legitimate. I wonder if he would be so generous if the counters were appointed by a Republican.
How does he like this one:
"And that's how Andy Fastow ended up with hundreds of millions of dollars, and that's where matters should have rested. All accounting is imperfect. The people who deserve the money are the ones who receive the most money. The goal of the beleagered SEC is to try to get the money spent by investors to match the money spent by the company, but when some money goes missing, who the hell cares."
Posted by: Bostonian on June 3, 2005 03:39 PMShades of Joseph Stalin, who said:
'It's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes'.
Sounds like Uncle Joe would have considered Geov Parrish a true comrade.....
Methow Ken
In order for a Republican to score a victory, the margin will have to be so big that not even KC elections can disguise the fraud.
Posted by: Bivouac Ponzetti on June 3, 2005 03:47 PMAgain I ask, would the liberal MSM be so "eh, what are you going to do" if Rossi had won by 129 votes? No way in hell.
Posted by: On the Far Right Side of the State on June 3, 2005 03:51 PMAh, this many would have made Stalin proud! He is attributed, in some circles as having said something to the effect that, "It is not important who casts the votes, but what is important is who counts the votes."
Yes, the Seattle Weekly, must have some Stalinist roots, or at least its authors!
Posted by: Bob on June 3, 2005 03:53 PMWhat should the rule be? Beats me.
But I'd be tempted, as the judge, to say, "it's the legislature's and secretary of state's job to get a better election system if this one is flawed. My job is to make sure a flawed election, where the true victor can't be known, doesn't decide our leadership."
However, I am unconvinced a revote is a proper remedy. OTOH, without a revote, how do you force the legislature and secretary to act? How do you discourage -- let alone prevent -- outright fraud in the future?
I was in favor in 2000 of letting the count stand, whatever it happened to be, unless outright fraud was found to make me think the result might have been changed. That didn't happen in 2000, and it is not happening now (though it is far closer now).
My preferred remedy in 2000 was then to have the laws changed to make the election system better. That is my preferred remedy now, too. But again, the legislature and secretary have been unwilling to do this. So I see no other remedy but a revote.
And wow ... I am listening to the Dems closing arguments, and she is just terrible. Contradicting the judge on the legal viaiblity of the statistical argument, completely misrepresenting the law ... and she actually said that five cherry-picked felons who said they voted for Rossi disproces the statistical argument from the Republicans, which is the most flatly ignorant and incorrect thing I've heard in this whole trial.
Durkin wants the court to accept illegal votes because Republicans cannot prove how they were cast. Democrats have built an elections system where there is no accountability. It is impossible to determine how an illegal vote was counted once it has been comingled, and that is what Democrats base their defense on.
King County Elections developed (devolved) their systems and processes to coerse more votes into the system and into the machines than those that are legal, because Democrats know that such a system will benefit Democrats. In defense of that system, Democrats then allege mistakes, not fraud, not criminal activity. But designing systems to fail for the express purpose of defrauding the voters is criminal. When election officials direct underlings to not investigate discrepencies that is criminal.
Posted by: Mike on June 3, 2005 04:00 PMIt is enough that the people know there was an election. Those who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.
I say he'll rule the KC certification invalid, and make them do it over. If they can't get an honest reconcile then they can't certify, forcing the legislature to re-certify without KC, or toss out the whole election.
(OK -- so I can dream)
Posted by: starboardhelm on June 3, 2005 04:16 PMGov. Christine Gregoire tapped Seattle Times spokeswoman Kerry Coughlin yesterday to be her communications director...Coughlin will begin work for Gregoire June 20. She will earn $125,000 a year.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/227039_coughlin03.html
Posted by: Skeptical on June 3, 2005 04:24 PMExactly what I was thinking.....what kind of a name is that?
Posted by: appalled on June 3, 2005 04:29 PMI have lots of questions for the legal eagles out there:
1) where does this case go if Judge Bridges rules in favor of the Republicans?
2) where does this go if Judge Bridges rules in favor of the Democrats?
3) Will we have to wait until 2006/2008 to make some real changes?
4) Even if we vote for these changes, either by initiative process or otherwise, can we be sure that Olympia will honor them?
I am looking back at all of the tricks that our so-called reps have pulled on us this last session and I genuinely fear that we have lost any ability to control them.
I have wandered off topic with some of these- sorry about that. But Stefan of some other reliable source could provide some insight, I would greatly appreciate it.
Posted by: ERNurse on June 3, 2005 04:32 PMConsider these things.
The D defense for mistakes is that there were more mistakes.
The defense for felons voting is more felons voting. They show that felons voted for Rossi they produce affidavits from the felon that he voted for Rossi. If he wanted Rossi he would say he voted for Gregoire. Did he get immunity for admitting he broke the law? This is not stupidity it is far beyond that, it is liberalism. They actually believe this stuff. This is the most difficult thing I have ever figured out in my 60 plus years.
Their expert says we should ask those who voted illegally how they voted? They consider this brilliant. They don't realize that we should then reverse the findings.
Can it really be that they have a mental problem. Check out the word and context of "reprobate" in the Bible. They call good evil and evil good. They suffer from mental disease.
http://eatthestate.org/05-08/WhereWereTorches.htm
Please remove your fingers from your ears and stop saying, "la la la la la" at the top of your voice.
Thank you. That is all.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 3, 2005 04:58 PMhttp://archives.lists.indymedia.org/www-features/2001-January/000041.html
Posted by: Serragon on June 3, 2005 05:07 PMDid the stupid legislature approve their request to issue 40 or 50 year bonds?
Posted by: BananaLand(aka Iguana) on June 3, 2005 06:41 PMThere isn't a donkey party member out there that didn't know what was going on. Even before the election was held. Throw them ALL in prison for election fraud!
The honorable judge, or his positional superiors on the bench in Thurston county are very close to endorsing the methods used in King County. Without a doubt, if this is allowed to stand, the donkey party will adhere to the wisdom of Gore, and actively engage in these things, for there will be 'no controlling legal authority.' Gore pulled it, they'll pull it again.
Frankly, I now view anyone sporting a Kerry sticker, or holding a jackass party sign as a supporter of illegality. I have yet to hear a single person from that party speak against what has happened. Or even the concept that their party would cheat to win. Or even the worry about elections being fair, just, and honest. Hell, we can't even get puported Republicans to speak against the practices that have been shown in King County.
Sorry, I cannot abide the sheer control certain groups have on our society, and how lacking in respect for the law and our state constitution some choose to conduct themselves.
Posted by: Patches Pal on June 3, 2005 07:57 PMI'm not so sure. You have the Dems in control of the counties where such schemes are most viable; and then there's also the fact that Republicans, in general, are far more likely to believe that there's a Supreme Being that frowns on cheating and cheaters. Fear of God seems to be in short supply in King County government--unless you understand that in King County Ron Sims has co-opted that title.
If Bridges doesn't void the election, not only is he giving the green light to fraud in the future, you can also bet farm that King County will NEVER have clean, honest and efficient elections ('We think we're making progress...we're not perfect yet, but we think we've implemented change for the better...')...because they'll always want the smoke screen of innocent errors and incompetence to mask whatever 'tweaking' they need to do to get the polically correct results the Democratic machine wants.
Posted by: Bivouac Ponzetti on June 3, 2005 07:58 PMFraud was not proven. It seems clear that fraud "must" have occurred but, it just wasn't proven
Judge Bridges stated the high standards required to overturn an election, he stated proportional analysis can be entered but that was no guarantee. Wasn't it the Republican statisition he said he'd run from if he had his class? he clearly was not buying what that statistitian was selling.
In the end, Bridges flat stated the R's had to prove Rossi received more votes. Other than their proportional analysis attempt, where did they do that?
All the R's really showed was how screwed up King County is, how sleazy some of the players are and that Handy is partisan even though he claims he isn't.
just not enough to get it done.
Posted by: who'dathunk? on June 3, 2005 08:27 PMThis kind of thinking really needs to be stamped out, and the best way of doing that is with a re-vote. Faster, please.
Posted by: chuck Miller on June 3, 2005 08:32 PMNow having read the whole article I suppose in his defense we can say the man is a moron. A more shoddily written partisan screed would be harder to find. But still...
Posted by: chuck Miller on June 3, 2005 08:41 PMWatch your step you might trip over your own bias vomit.
You need a history lesson.
Gore had never one a count or a recount or recount of a recount.
Rossi won two counts and only loss the third when King county kept finding more votes which turned out to mostly illegal votes .
I hate to see or demorcracy left up to left wingers like yourself. Who are know licking thier chops saying that you can cheat and steal an election just make sure to keep it close - that way it just looks like a bunch bumbling mistakes.
You know it's true, because King county is not even trying to make big fixes to correct the problems.
So you keep that big socialist smile on your face, Because Dean Logan has shown you the way to the promise land in every election.
Good news is your Hybrid car can afford that new big fat gas tax that your messiah said she wasn't going to give us.
Your wrong about the polls as well, look at the newest Kirotv.com poll.
Now go save serial killer and execute a fetus.
I know that last one was overbaord - but I was having some fun.
Posted by: fedup on June 3, 2005 09:38 PMAn election CANNOT be so mistake-ridden that you can't tell who the winner is! Now compare his garbage with the Dem complaints about Ohio. They should all be embarrassed. A 129-vote margin is just fine with more mistakes than margin; but a 100k victory margin by Bush is suspect. PLEASE, PEOPLE! Stop insulting our intelligence!
Posted by: Michele on June 3, 2005 10:14 PMYou shouldn't let your hate blind you.
You need a history lesson.
Gore never had a recount. The an activist Supreme Court stopped one from even occuring, even though allowed by Florida law. All reviews have shown that a full state recount based upon the standard supported by George W. Bush woudl have lead to a Gore win. Plus, Gore had more votes nationally.
Rossi was ahead on two counts, but only in the second one because King County, in a cunning plan to help Gregoire, had failed to count a number of votes they should have. On the final count, he lost. Almost every vote the GOP claims to be illegal were counted in the first and second counts (felons, provisionals sent through the accuvote, etc.). In fact, the votes that should have been counted in the second count and would have put Gregoire in the least in the second count were approved by the Supreme Court.
I hate to see our demorcracy left up to right wingers like you. Should Rossi win this court challange, conservatives will now be licking thier chops saying that you can cheat and steal an election just make sure to keep it close - and then use propaganda to get a win. Claim any thing you want, felons vote, soilders don't, for instance, or that people are illegally altering votes, or fraud, and don't worry about proving a thing. The charge is all that matters. Make it loud and often enough, and who cares that you can't prove it.
You know it's true, because the GOP is not even trying to win this trial.
So you keep that big facist smile on your face, Because Rossi and Dale Foreman have shown you the way to the promise land in every election.
Good news is your SUV car won't use that much gas shut off in stop and go traffic because we won't have any money for roads because your messiah will be too busy paying off the BIAW for his court victory to care about the crap our roads are in due to Tim Eymen, John Carlson, Kirby Wilbur and others who have shut down every attempt to make things better in the last ten years because obviously things get some much better when you do nothing.
Let me go find an internet poll that agrees with me, because, trust me, here at Sound Politics, we know how accurate the internet is. Why just the other day, this nice women in Kenya offered me a million dollars if she could transfer all her millions from Africa to the US using my bank account. I just have to give her my bank account number.
Now go lynch a minority or cheat a working man so that you don't have to pay taxes.
I know that last one was overbaord - but I was having some fun. [sic]
Whether or not one ascribes moral weight to the Old Testament, this should be the overriding commandment of the elections department.
To bear proper witness to an election requires that one truthfully and fully report what you know, truthfully and fully report what you do not know, and call to attention what is apparently misleading or inaccurate testimony by another. The validity of an election system depends on true witness.
Now, in the real world, there are people who are misinterpret or misperceive the facts in front of them, willfully misrepresent the facts to their own ends, or are inattentive to critical details. This catagory encircles just about everyone, especially when they're tired, numbed by repetativeness, or overwhelmed. This impedes our necessary element of true witness.
This is why an election system must be devised based on the assumption that everyone participating will make errors. (No judgements here as to deliberateness.) When you've designed the system around the premise that the voter will try to double-vote, will try to feed a provisional ballot into the counting machines, is most likely not a legal voter, you will design the system to automatically prevent or compensate for the failures. Then you design the counting process around the premise that the counter is an incurable partisan, and thus will try to slip in a few more votes for their candidate if they think they can get away with it. You'd then design the process with semi-random crosschecks that wouldn't let a ballot box pass until it had been counted a couple times and each count matched. The process would then assume that the canvassing boards and election officials have an agenda, either collectively or singly, which would show in their diligence to pursue election errors in the favor of their agenda. You would then design the process to give no discretion to the investigators, and force verifable documentation at every step. At the end, if there are enough errors to call into question the result (every error being treated as a uncollapsed quantum state that encompasses all possibilities), it is necessary and proper to declare a do-over, even if it is just at the precinct level.
As much as I want to believe that inside each person is a hero, a true stalwart against the failings of humanity, I remember one thing: The 240V socket that my dryer plugs into. It is shaped completely unlike every other socket in my house, and for good reason: If I plugged any of my regular 120V appliances into that socket, they would pop, possibly catch fire. When it is absolutely, positively critical that something not be screwed up, it is in your interest to put such barriers in the way that a person trying to screw it up would have to go through herculean, blatantly obvious contortions to accomplish them.
Bottom Line: An election system is not the place for Pollyanna-ish faith in the ability of people to follow proper procedures.
What do you consider as cheating or fraud?
What do you call it when a person votes twice?
What do you call it when a felon votes?
What do you call it when a person casts a vote for a dead person?
What do you call it when persons make up numbers out of thin air to reconcile? And then signs attesting to its accuracy?
WHat do you call it when there are more ballots than voters?
Just curious....cuz I don't get yer logic.....
Its your willingness to overlook fact and live in a fantasy world of feelings which scare the moderates and conservatives. You make Dean look moderate with your rhetoric. Under the rule you propose there would be no military, no progress, and a socialist state. Shortly thereafter there would be rampant crime from everyone doing what feels good without regard for the consequences and then foreign countries would invade through our open borders, all without firing a shot. Thank goodness there are still people willing to stand up to such traitorous thoughts. Go away JDB, we have your number.
Posted by: Mark Beyer on June 4, 2005 08:28 AM
The mail ballot report to the KC canvassing board was knowingly false. It stated that the counted ballots and rejected ballots equaled the ballots received.
Months later, 96 of these ballots were found unopened.
If the canvassing board had information of discrepencies, would they have forced a more diligent effort to learn the truth? Judging from their performance, hard to know, but they weren't even given that chance. Way testified that the report was falsified. Falsifying is not the same as an honest mistake.
Ms. Durkan (The Dems) supported Way's method of math yesterday which was obviously wrong.
Regardless of the trial outcome, the Dems have demonstrated that they could care less about fair and honest elections - anything goes, as long as they win.
Posted by: Jack on June 4, 2005 09:33 AMYou're gonna scare the trolls off that way...
Posted by: alphabet soup on June 4, 2005 09:46 AM"close examination of broader group of rejected ballots than those covered in court decisions shows Gore might have won if courts ordered full statewide recount of all rejected ballots, and if he pursued in court action he publicly advocated of calling on state to count all votes; finds statistical support for complaints of many voters, particularly elderly Democrats in Palm Beach County, who said in interviews after election that confusing ballot designs may have led them to spoil their ballots by voting for more than one candidate; charts; photos"
Facts are a terrible thing, aren't they Mr. Beyer
Posted by: JDB on June 4, 2005 11:40 AMFWIW, I think Rossi will be done after Monday. Not because the Republicans haven't proved that he was cheated, that fraud was committed, that KC election officials are complete and utter blithering idiots and nincompoops, because I think that has been demonstrated more than adequately. It is because with the judicial system we have now in this country (as demonstrated by the Terri Schiavo travesty of justice), following process has trumped the fair administration of justice, and keeping the status quo has assumed more importance than the truth.
So my guess is that Bridges will administer a "severe" and "stinging" (to use the largely meaningless words propsed for censure during Clinton's impeachment) tongue-lashing to KC election officials, but then say, sorry, there's nothing "the law" can do about it (which, if true, all I can say is, "the law" is an ass).
And the KC election officials and their 'Rat compadres will sit and hang their heads in court, or nod in agreement, and make statements like, "yes, we screwed up, and we really, really promise this time to never, never, swear-on-a-stack-of-Bibles-and-bureaucrats, ever do it again. Then outside the court they'll be laughing and high-fiving each other about putting another stolen election in the books. Fraudoire will chime in with another "blue ribbon Commission" that Commissar Reed will head up, to "make sure" the next election is run properly (i.e., all the 'Rats get re-elected). And the 'Rat scum and swine in the media and elsewhere, as well as the MoveOn.org stiking, lousy 'Rats will say, "see, Dino, we were right all the time, now move on".
I really, really hate these lousy b*stards.
1. KC implemented a new computer system that no one knew how to use properly.
2. The “rule book” that the SoS office sent to all auditors was not followed.
3. The number of ballots vs. the number of living registered voters does not equal each other.
4. The absentee reconciliation repot is NOT a TRUE report.
5. KC cannot handle the volume of ballots near 900k. (e.g. LA County can handle over 3 mill.)
6. Diseased, felons, double, and illegal voters were admitted in the legitimate “voting pool”.
7. At times the Republican observers were not notified when ballots were being handled, counted and transported.
8. The ballots in KC were not secured while “in the cage.”
9. Election errors were insurmountable.
10. The Democrats clearly demonstrated that not only did KC botch the certification but other counties had anomalous votes counted as well.
11. Notwithstanding, the democrats (and trolls on this blog) think there is nothing wrong with this scenario and view this as democracy in action.
Needless to say, the honorable Bridges has a lot to ponder this weekend.
Posted by starboardhelm at June 3, 2005 07
Can someone make this into a bumper sticker? I LOVE this!
Posted by: Shari on June 4, 2005 12:18 PM