Judge Bridges has ruled against the plaintiffs and let stand the results of the 2004 governor's election. He did not accept the use of proportional deduction and did not find fraud either by the election workers or the parties. So, given that the Supreme Court will most likely not change findings of fact and therefore not overrule, Christine Gregoire will be governor through 2008.
But Judge Bridges did find that many irregularities took place, and he put the burden explicitly on the voters to hold elected officials and elections officials accountable for these problems. Where the law will not provide relief because it is not specific enough or sets the wrong standards, we must work through the political process to change the law. Where officials have low standards, we must work to replace them with officials with higher standards.
As voters, we have all the power we need to make these changes, regardless of the decisions of any court, executive or legislature. Our remedy is to be more organized and to work for candidates who believe as we do. This is one election. There will be hundreds more in our lifetimes and we must contest them all. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
Posted by Andy MacDonald at June 06, 2005 09:52 AM | Email ThisCordially...
Posted by: Rick on June 6, 2005 10:02 AMI recomend starting in Ohio... if you can find a R' Supreme not recused because of coin scandal, or SOS the same, or governor the same, or Att General the same...
Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
agree w/that. Thank God for honest Judges in Wa. state.
Posted by: jdm on June 6, 2005 10:02 AMHAHAHAHAHA!
Posted by: Rosi Lost on June 6, 2005 10:03 AMHe puts the burden back on us voters. What a novel solution. I like it.
Posted by: swatter on June 6, 2005 10:04 AMNow get....
Buh bye.
Posted by: Janet on June 6, 2005 10:05 AMThey face a contest under a statute that had a burden so high as to be impossible to meet.
Hopefully the voters do not forget soon what happened, and how misconduct and incompentence trashed an election and gave us an uncertain mandate.
Posted by: karl on June 6, 2005 10:05 AMHis call for the voters rings hollow. What difference does it make who votes if those who count them are dishonest?
Our democracy just took a huge hit.
Posted by: steve_dog on June 6, 2005 10:05 AMIn effect he said that petitioners must either show clear fraud or that the ballots directly affected the outcome in a particular way. With secret voting that is impossible.
Unless there is a change in the law then I think his ruling has effectively made election contests impossible in this state.
Posted by: TonyG on June 6, 2005 10:05 AMAnyone need a Unix/Perl guy in Alaska?
It is time to return home; where the corruption is manageble.
Posted by: Gary on June 6, 2005 10:06 AMWe knew the Democrat party machine was stealing elections but it took this past election to finally motivate someone to do something...
now, the cat's out of the bag...
we know who the enemy is....
there will be other elections, and if this past election and this expose of fraud doesn't motivate the fringe voter to vote down the Democrat party, I don't know what will...
thanks to Shark, this thing really moved...
We live to fight another day, and that day will come sooner then we think, and next time, we will be prepared....
I think the Democrat Party rule is going to end very soon in Washington....I think they have blown their "wad" so to speak in stealing this election as well as the Cantwell election...
Congrats again to Shark.....you are a true patriot ......
Posted by: lee on June 6, 2005 10:07 AMWe just need to work together to get GOP majorities in both the state House and Senate in 2006. With all this anger at Gregoire, it should be easy to do if we do it.
Posted by: Kyle on June 6, 2005 10:07 AMBridges disagrees w/that assumption, as does the evidence.
Posted by: jdm on June 6, 2005 10:07 AMWe knew the Democrat party machine was stealing elections but it took this past election to finally motivate someone to do something...
now, the cat's out of the bag...
we know who the enemy is....
there will be other elections, and if this past election and this expose of fraud doesn't motivate the fringe voter to vote down the Democrat party, I don't know what will...
thanks to Shark, this thing really moved...
We live to fight another day, and that day will come sooner then we think, and next time, we will be prepared....
I think the Democrat Party rule is going to end very soon in Washington....I think they have blown their "wad" so to speak in stealing this election as well as the Cantwell election...
Congrats again to Shark.....you are a true patriot ......
Posted by: lee on June 6, 2005 10:07 AMEven those who were found guilty of voting twice were given a slap on the wrist and basically we were told that it's ok to vote twice if your loved one or spouse died.
This is not a ruling for Justice, but a ruling for Kings
Posted by: FireWolf on June 6, 2005 10:08 AMIn effect he said that petitioners must either show clear fraud or that the ballots directly affected the outcome in a particular way. With secret voting that is impossible.
Unless there is a change in the law then I think his ruling has effectively made election contests impossible in this state.
Posted by: TonyG on June 6, 2005 10:08 AMBridges disagrees w/that assumption, as does the evidence.
Posted by: jdm on June 6, 2005 10:09 AMCordially...
Posted by: Rick on June 6, 2005 10:09 AMA watershed event for me. Working harder in this system is simply playing their game.
The 2nd amendment was created for these times.
His call for the voters rings hollow. What difference does it make who votes if those who count them are dishonest?
Our democracy just took a huge hit.
Posted by: steve_dog on June 6, 2005 10:09 AMHow can you use "the process" to change "the process" when "the process" itself is corrupt? How can you throw out of office the same cheating, lying, corrupt officials who control the elections? Just like he imposed an impossible standard on the plaintiffs (prove who the specific illegal votes were cast for), Bridges has placed an impossible task upon the honest voters: throw out the corrupt officials who control the very election process by which you seek to throw them out.
Bridges disagrees w/that assumption, as does the evidence.
Posted by: jdm on June 6, 2005 10:11 AMThe real purpose (I believe) of this court case is to shine a light on the Ron Sims Administration and the need to change it. If this cannot be accomplished, we are going to lose control of honest elections in this state and will continue down the path of Chicago, Los Angeles and other corrupt election systems.
Posted by: jaybo on June 6, 2005 10:11 AMYour "HAHAHAHAHA!" will com back to bite you (You know where) during the next election. This NOT a good thing for Dems. It may not be what "we the people" wanted, but we WILL get what we want in the future.
Posted by: Kell on June 6, 2005 10:11 AMNotice how he cited all the serious problems, even Nicole Way's problems. He cited these to point out that the law doesn't address this. That tells me our law is unjust.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on June 6, 2005 10:12 AMWe just tried.
Posted by: Barcroft on June 6, 2005 10:12 AMOr if 1000 extra votes show up in the accuvote there is no way to invalidate because you can't show which ones were illegal and who they voted for..
This just encourages more cheating. Ridiculous and stunning decision...
Posted by: Mark on June 6, 2005 10:13 AMSupposedly, the earring worn by Bridges had already leaked word of the decision to the Seattle times over the weekend.
Posted by: John Billings on June 6, 2005 10:14 AMWho took a huge hit was Rossi. May he crawl back into the cave from which he came.
Good riddance.
Posted by: jim on June 6, 2005 10:14 AMLooks like you owe your buddy Goldy an appoligy! But then again, thats not something neocons do best, now is it?
Posted by: DamnageD on June 6, 2005 10:14 AMWho took a huge hit was Rossi. May he crawl back into the cave from which he came.
Good riddance.
Posted by: jim on June 6, 2005 10:15 AMNo more claims of fraud without proof.
No more claims of military ballots being messed with without proof.
No more use of selective statistics to bolster a partisan point of view.
No more use of over the top rhetoric without basis.
No more listenting to only propogandistic sources of information that agree with only one side of an issue.
No more name calling of those who point out failures of logic on my side.
If we start with these principles, we will truly have a democracy to be proud of.
Posted by: JDB on June 6, 2005 10:15 AMJosef Stalin
Posted by: Aaron on June 6, 2005 10:16 AMBut the elites protect themselves, public be damned. So fraud it tolerated, which is why often there so much of it in near-100% Democratic precincts. A specialty.
Sigh. Re-defeat Gingoire in 2008. How's that for clever?
Cordially...
Posted by: Rick on June 6, 2005 10:16 AMAnd it's obvious there was fraud. Gregoire's vote count didn't randomly get closer and closer to victory until the final hand count --when, voila!, it magically went over the top. This was systematic theft. And that's not even getting to the fraud before the polls closed on election day. The Republicans should have taken it on as Job #1 to find that fraud, and Job #2 to prove it in court. They didn't. It seemed like they never even wanted to go there.
Posted by: jaybird on June 6, 2005 10:17 AMBill H
Posted by: Bill H on June 6, 2005 10:17 AMWho took a huge hit was Rossi. May he crawl back into the cave from which he came.
Good riddance.
Posted by: jim on June 6, 2005 10:18 AMHugh Hewitt is right: if it's not close, they can't cheat.
Don't let it be so close next time.
***
And I've been saying all along that there seems to be grounds for a federal case, even if the US attorney has been mum on that.
Voting in Washington is based on the honor system, therefore if illegal votes are cast, an election contest is contingent on those who cast an illegal vote doing the honorable thing and identifying the fact they violated the law and disclosing whom they voted for when they violated the law. Then and only then can a ballot be contested under the law.
Since this isn't going to happen, lets just end the charade of the state actually having an election challenge statute.
Mark
Posted by: Mark D on June 6, 2005 10:18 AMWho took a huge hit was Rossi. May he crawl back into the cave from which he came.
Good riddance.
Posted by: jim on June 6, 2005 10:19 AMLOSERS!
How's that feel, you would-be election stealers?
Get a life, rather than filling up the courts with more frivolous lawsuits, willya? Somehow I doubt it - and you'll mask your lack of evidence with more worthless statistical analysis which everybody knows is as crooked as the GOP is.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!
Posted by: name on June 6, 2005 10:19 AMWhy is it you people in 2000 were joyous and ecstatic you were able to cheat to win, but in 2004, with no evidence of cheating, you none the less tried to change the rules in the middle of the game, tried every trick in the book to justify a recount or a new election ... Gore (and Slade Gorton in 2000!) were gracious in defeat.
The Rossi Republicans in 2004 were anything but.
See you in the next election, can't wait for Chris "whiny pants" Vance's latest spin to show up in the news over this decision.
Posted by: Dave D on June 6, 2005 10:19 AM2 - is the owner of this blog going to stand by his assertion that the judge "side"s "with Stalin"? Yet another example of extremism that is, of course, completely irresponsible.
Long and short of it is - get out and vote (at every level), but realize that in the grand scheme of things (of which there is none), this and everything else are mere blinks in the realm of existence.
C'mon, folks, it passes the day, makes for some interesting reading/listening - but is it truly worth the extremism?
Posted by: TJ on June 6, 2005 10:19 AMWhile he agreed there where far more illegal votes than the spread, he concluded that the Rossi team failed to show "causation" (i.e. that enough illegal votes went to Gregoire to change the election). I don't agree with his causation requirement because it is vitually impossible to prove who all the illegals voted for given the constitutional right to secrecy. While a few felons testified they voted for Rossi or Bennett, it does not go to the vast majority of illegal votes. I noticed Bridges did not cite, discuss or distinquish the Foulkes case. In my opinion, the errors, mistakes and omissions speak for themselves and should be enough. The law has a term: res ipsa loquitur [i.e. "the thing speaks for itself"]. Res ipsa loquitur is a rule of evidence whereby negligence of alleged wrongdoing may be inferred from the mere fact that the accident happened (e.g. plane crash). Here, the election process/system crashed to such a degree that the number of illegal votes far exceeded the spread. To require Rossi's team to prove how each illegal voter voted was and is impossible.
Posted by: Newman on June 6, 2005 10:20 AMhe was very clear: there were no crimes.
But that's almost always the case with vote fraud, which is among the reasons why it's so practiced in near-100% Democratic precincts.
if you listened to Bridges detailing of county by county problems (reconciliation in particular), he made clear this assumption of yours is false as well.
(and apoligies for my multiple posts: maybe SP getting overwhelmed, as my browser just "hung" for each subsequent one. again, apologies).
Posted by: jdm on June 6, 2005 10:21 AMHaving awakened some years back to what the dimocraps routinely do, this was STILL a shock.
Essentially, I get the impression that stuffing the balot box was just declared legal :-(.
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide
everything." -Joseph Stalin
So next election:
Not bother to vote?
Register 25 or 30 times and stuff the balot box on my chosen side?
Neiter is acceptable.
I do think that the dimocraps have, hopefully, commited political suicide. We can only hope.
Restored confidence in the election process - not for me.
/SO Disgusted.
Posted by: Fox3 on June 6, 2005 10:21 AMBut I'll settle for our state, for now.
Posted by: Will on June 6, 2005 10:21 AMI hope the next few months are so hard on her, resignation would sound like sweet salvation.
More ballots then votes... A fitting end to the 2004 election.
Posted by: Joe on June 6, 2005 10:23 AMNext election, Vote Twice!!!
Posted by: Brent from Clark County on June 6, 2005 10:23 AMAs far as election reform and contest laws, it should be changed by initiative. That will take the power out of Olympia. I would start by proposing that the state outsource elections to a big 8 accounting firm. It would be run with an unbiased efficiency, competency, and would save the taxpayers big $$.
Posted by: Bill on June 6, 2005 10:23 AMBridges knew all along the GOP could not prove who the illegals voted for. The Washington statute is meaningless or Bridges was the ultimate activist. According to Bridges logic, no matter what degree of illegal voting, it could have been 50,000 votes, it would not have changed the outcome! Judicial Trickery!
Get rid of Bridges!
Posted by: blasater on June 6, 2005 10:23 AMBut I'll settle for our state, for now.
Posted by: Will on June 6, 2005 10:24 AMWhile he agreed there where far more illegal votes than the spread, he concluded that the Rossi team failed to show "causation" (i.e. that enough illegal votes went to Gregoire to change the election). I don't agree with his causation requirement because it is vitually impossible to prove who all the illegals voted for given the constitutional right to secrecy. While a few felons testified they voted for Rossi or Bennett, it does not go to the vast majority of illegal votes. I noticed Bridges did not cite, discuss or distinquish the Foulkes case. In my opinion, the errors, mistakes and omissions speak for themselves and should be enough. The law has a term: res ipsa loquitur [i.e. "the thing speaks for itself"]. Res ipsa loquitur is a rule of evidence whereby negligence of alleged wrongdoing may be inferred from the mere fact that the accident happened (e.g. plane crash). Here, the election process/system crashed to such a degree that the number of illegal votes far exceeded the spread. To require Rossi's team to prove how each illegal voter voted was and is impossible.
Posted by: Newman on June 6, 2005 10:24 AMOthers of their ilk control our State's government and have changed the laws to prevent their removal.
Are we left with only the Second Amendment to set things right? Is this what the Legislature wants?
Posted by: lee egg on June 6, 2005 10:24 AM
Therefore, we will see MORE fraud, not less, because of this ruling---until the law is changed.
Until that day comes, a republican will NEVER, ever win a close statewide race in Washington because the 'fix' has just been de facto blessed with no real consequences.
This is a tragic day for the citizens of Washington
Posted by: Michele on June 6, 2005 10:24 AMAs long as the election process is controlled by felons and ballot stuffers, there is no hope that voters will ever be able to fix problems.
I am sorry to say but democracy is lost here. Voters can't get it back through a delusion that it still exists.
Even if 100,000 angry voters show up next election to vote in candidates with higher standards, the elections office will allow those votes to be cancelled by illegal and invalid votes.
For real voters to prevail they need to have a democratic system. It does not exist now.
For those that are familiar with Washington State law, there is no hope of using the initiative process either. Because election laws can only be changed by amending the State constitution.
Again sorry to say this is an enormous loss for all those that believe in justice and democracy.
Posted by: Michael on June 6, 2005 10:25 AMI take back what I said earlier about moving to Alaska when I finish college. I'm packing my family up and getting them out of here before Comrade Christine gets her re-education camps set up and closes the border to keep us from leaving. God knows she gets whatever else she wants.
Posted by: Jarhead on June 6, 2005 10:25 AMHopefully you'll soon get out from behind your keyboards and then we can have it out. I, for one, am sick and tired of dealing with your crap. From McChimpyBushitlerstein, to Howard Dean to the rest of you on the miserable Left - come on out and play. You said you were going to "riot motherf***ers" if Bush won, but ya didn't. You say you're going to all these other things to overthrow the facists in office, but you never do.
Please. Light the fuse.
I know I don't speak for many people on this board, but I do know a lot of people share similar feelings. The sooner we get this done, the sooner we can get on with fighting our other enemies overseas.
Posted by: jimg on June 6, 2005 10:25 AMHopefully you'll soon get out from behind your keyboards and then we can have it out. I, for one, am sick and tired of dealing with your crap. From McChimpyBushitlerstein, to Howard Dean to the rest of you on the miserable Left - come on out and play. You said you were going to "riot motherf***ers" if Bush won, but ya didn't. You say you're going to all these other things to overthrow the facists in office, but you never do.
Please. Light the fuse.
I know I don't speak for many people on this board, but I do know a lot of people share similar feelings. The sooner we get this done, the sooner we can get on with fighting our other enemies overseas.
Posted by: jimg on June 6, 2005 10:26 AMBridges knew all along the GOP could not prove who the illegals voted for. The Washington statute is meaningless or Bridges was the ultimate activist. According to Bridges logic, no matter what degree of illegal voting, it could have been 50,000 votes, it would not have changed the outcome! Judicial Trickery!
Get rid of Bridges!
Posted by: blasater on June 6, 2005 10:26 AMBridges knew all along the GOP could not prove who the illegals voted for. The Washington statute is meaningless or Bridges was the ultimate activist. According to Bridges logic, no matter what degree of illegal voting, it could have been 50,000 votes, it would not have changed the outcome! Judicial Trickery!
Get rid of Bridges!
Posted by: blasater on June 6, 2005 10:26 AMAs a trial judge, Bridges was bound to take the statutes at their word, and they are completely inadequate to deal with this situation. At the end, he ordered that the illegal votes be deducted from the total votes cast, but could not and would not deduct any portion of those votes from the totals counted for each candidate. The statutes provided no method for him to do so.
What he did do was make the inadequacy of the election contest statutes clearly visible for everyone to see, and the Supreme Court is not bound to follow them. The SC can address this public policy issue as a case of first impression; it can decide whether the democratic process requires a clear winner; and it can void the election on that ground and thereby force the legislature to revise the statutes. It can also recognize that the current statutes, as written, and as made evident by this case, create a legal standard for a successful contest that is actually impossible to meet (so long as we have secret ballots), and direct the legislature to revise the statutes accordingly.
Will they? We'll see.
Good work.
Losers.
Posted by: A Winner on June 6, 2005 10:27 AMOther than that, we're supposed to fix a broken voting system by using the broken voting system?
Posted by: Steve N on June 6, 2005 10:27 AMBridges knew all along the GOP could not prove who the illegals voted for. The Washington statute is meaningless or Bridges was the ultimate activist. According to Bridges logic, no matter what degree of illegal voting, it could have been 50,000 votes, it would not have changed the outcome! Judicial Trickery!
Get rid of Bridges!
Posted by: blasater on June 6, 2005 10:28 AMBridges knew all along the GOP could not prove who the illegals voted for. The Washington statute is meaningless or Bridges was the ultimate activist. According to Bridges logic, no matter what degree of illegal voting, it could have been 50,000 votes, it would not have changed the outcome! Judicial Trickery!
Get rid of Bridges!
Posted by: blasater on June 6, 2005 10:28 AMThe judge did not call Rossi's case frivolous, not by any means.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 6, 2005 10:28 AMIt appears that Judge Bridges ruling was more of a simple sound bite answer to Durkans long winded closing argument..
He mentioned the validity of 2.8 million legal votes over the 2000+ illegal votes - as did Durkan in her closing..
He mentioned the 4 certified Felon Statements indicating they voted for Rossi....and mentioned that the Petitiners provided no proof that felons voted for Gregoire..(as if certifications from felons could be considered reliable..)
He chose to question Gill and Katz proportional analysis - as recommended by Durkan in her closing...
His entire decision appears to have been made from the Intervenors closing argument - with little regard to the Petitioners evidence and findings during the trial....
I don't understand why......Doesn't make sense to me.. I'll have to ponder this awhile..
Regardless of the Supreme Court take on the Judges ruling in appeal - it is obvious now - that the responsibility of a fair and uncorrupted election is up to us - the people. And we must do all we can to insure that this fraud, error, and ignorance never happens again in King and other counties in this state!
No, when the SoS has certified an election the peoples voice doesn't matter!
WE MUST HAVE REAL ELECTION REFORM!
If all Vote-By-Mail is adopted we may never get this chance again.
Posted by: Splatter on June 6, 2005 10:28 AMIt appears that Judge Bridges ruling was more of a simple sound bite answer to Durkans long winded closing argument..
He mentioned the validity of 2.8 million legal votes over the 2000+ illegal votes - as did Durkan in her closing..
He mentioned the 4 certified Felon Statements indicating they voted for Rossi....and mentioned that the Petitiners provided no proof that felons voted for Gregoire..(as if certifications from felons could be considered reliable..)
He chose to question Gill and Katz proportional analysis - as recommended by Durkan in her closing...
His entire decision appears to have been made from the Intervenors closing argument - with little regard to the Petitioners evidence and findings during the trial....
I don't understand why......Doesn't make sense to me.. I'll have to ponder this awhile..
Regardless of the Supreme Court take on the Judges ruling in appeal - it is obvious now - that the responsibility of a fair and uncorrupted election is up to us - the people. And we must do all we can to insure that this fraud, error, and ignorance never happens again in King and other counties in this state!
Rossi's win was just too small! We need a 100,000 vote advantage to assure the result.
Posted by: Jim Thomasson on June 6, 2005 10:28 AMIt appears that Judge Bridges ruling was more of a simple sound bite answer to Durkans long winded closing argument..
He mentioned the validity of 2.8 million legal votes over the 2000+ illegal votes - as did Durkan in her closing..
He mentioned the 4 certified Felon Statements indicating they voted for Rossi....and mentioned that the Petitiners provided no proof that felons voted for Gregoire..(as if certifications from felons could be considered reliable..)
He chose to question Gill and Katz proportional analysis - as recommended by Durkan in her closing...
His entire decision appears to have been made from the Intervenors closing argument - with little regard to the Petitioners evidence and findings during the trial....
I don't understand why......Doesn't make sense to me.. I'll have to ponder this awhile..
Regardless of the Supreme Court take on the Judges ruling in appeal - it is obvious now - that the responsibility of a fair and uncorrupted election is up to us - the people. And we must do all we can to insure that this fraud, error, and ignorance never happens again in King and other counties in this state!
Wow, this sounds like karma here. Presidential elections in 2000 and 2004? Wonder if we would have noticed the cheating that happened in Florida and Ohio, respectively, if those elections weren't so close.
But I guess it's only a crime if the other side does it, right? After all, for Dems, Democrats can do no such wrong. For Rethugs, their politicians are guiltless too, right?
Posted by: Sputnik on June 6, 2005 10:30 AMSo -- time to change the state laws! This case has highlighted the flaws in our system and we need to fix them. All crowing from the liberals aside, I'll bet even most of them are aware of the need for better election management.
Posted by: starboardhelm on June 6, 2005 10:30 AMThey now know for sure that if they can just GET an illegal ballot into the hopper, it will count, regardless of what else happens. That's how it will be until the law gets changed.
This is a tragic day for Washington state. The Stalinists who 'counted' the votes and got access to all the blank ballots they wanted got their way.
Posted by: Michele on June 6, 2005 10:30 AMI hope it can handle the traffic!
Posted by: Deborah on June 6, 2005 10:30 AM
They kept saying that they couldn't figure out which way he buttered his toast.
Always remember this...
As I said before, Liberals camouflage themselves and this judge camouflaged himself throughout this trial. That is how I knew he was a liberal. If this judge were a conservative you would have known it. It would be evident. That is how conservatives are. There aren't any guessing games or hiding/stalling tactics.
Liberals are liars and cowards. They have to hide their intentions to push thier agenda through the courts because they can't win at the polls nationally when they reveal who they are. Look at Hillary Clinton...
Does anyone believe that she is a centrist? Well she is "moving to the middle" and pushing this moderate nonsense now (holding hands with Mccain and Gingrich) but we all know who she is. We know who her husband is.
I think it is time to wake up and realize that these liberals can NOT be bargained or compromised with. Not any more. It seems like the big mistake here was the Republicans bargaining/compromising with the Dems on this judge. This guy was a liberal plant from day one and they knew it.
Bridges essentially said that an election contest statute is only useful in those rare situations where the direct evidence of the distribution of illegal votes is reasonably obtainable, clearly not the case here. In other words, errors that reflect broad trends are not contestable because evidence related to broad trends, the ecological approach, is not acceptable. Put another way, one can make decisions to shortchange electoral safeguards, reap the benefits of such decisions and not pay a price. We know that there was no effort at all in King, and apparently Pierce Co., to bar voting by felons. And it is unlikely there will be any strengthening of these processes in the future.
Posted by: barchester on June 6, 2005 10:33 AMGod help us.
Posted by: Keri on June 6, 2005 10:34 AMI can't believe it is now the practice to give credibility to felon affidavits. They now get two bites at the apple. First they get to vote, negating a legal vote. Then, they can sign an affidavit "claiming" to have voted for a candidate, potentially negating another legal vote.
These guys who admitted voting need to be prosecuted to make this scenario a little less appealing.
Posted by: California Dreamer on June 6, 2005 10:35 AMNeither in FL 2000 or OH 2004, did I hear ANY talk about all the stuff that this case has PROVEN that KCE committed.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 6, 2005 10:35 AMNincompoop: One deficient in judgment and good sense: ass, fool, idiot, imbecile, jackass, mooncalf, moron, ninny, nitwit, simple, simpleton, softhead, tomfool. Informal : dope, gander, goose. Slang : cretin, ding-dong, dip, goof, jerk, nerd, schmo, schmuck, turkey.
Posted by: starboardhelm on June 6, 2005 10:36 AMWe can never trust our ballots to be handled properly. They can be "lost", enhanced with felt pens or cancelled out by a felon or deceased persons vote. Voting is a farce, it is merely a bone to toss to the drones to make us feel that we are part of the process, when in fact we are anything but. We live in a dictatorship.
Posted by: Vicki on June 6, 2005 10:36 AMListen, from the left, I've seen and participated in a similar myopic view. It clouds your vision, causes you to look for evidence in only one direction, and in the end, eliminates your ability to see and think clearly.
This web site has reflected this type of thinking for months. There has been no rational discussion going on here.
I am a dem, and I applaud this ruling, not because the Dems won, but because it makes legal sense, and is good for the ongoing democracy, inspite of the hysteria displayed by some here.
I am not evil. I do not condone fraud. I would willingly and gladly support the removal of Gov. Gregoire had fraud been shown. But, it hasn't been.
This is not you vs. us. This is us. We disagree, but I have lots of GOP friends, and I'll continue to engage in persuasion and discussion with all of you, and we'll continue to work together to improve this State.
I acknowledge your dissapointment. I reject your label of me as evil and dishonest. I am a concerned citizen and patriot just as you are, and I too want fair and honest elections.
Let us move forward together.
Posted by: Timothy Killian on June 6, 2005 10:36 AMDon't register multiple times. Don't vote twice or more times.
Also, don't let this get you down! Ultimately, we will win.
Vote in the next election, once. And get all of your neighbors to vote, once. You do not defeat evil conspirators with more evil conspiracies. You defeat them with honesty, integrity, and accountability. Remember how Moses defeated the Egyptian Empire. That's what we need, and that's what we're really fighting for. Do you think Ron Sims and Christine Gregoire are more powerful than the Egyptian Pharoah? Do you think they are stronger than King George, Adolf Hitler, Emperor Hirohito, or even Gorbachev? We defeated them all.
*WHEN* Ron Sims et al gets held accountable they will be punished justly. Don't screw things up for yourselves!
Remember, we are a nation ruled not by men and not even by laws, but by God. Petition him and see if he will restore the election and justify all the wrongs committed. That's how General George Washington defeated King George and his immense empire. That's how Reagan beat the Communist Empire. That's how we are going to beat King Sims.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on June 6, 2005 10:36 AMJust beat them and take away their power. If they act this ridiculously immature when they win, imagine the howls when they lose.
That will be a beautiful thing.
Posted by: Slublog on June 6, 2005 10:38 AMIs Rossi just another political hack wannabe?
He should run for Governor in 2008 or not at all.
Posted by: Hippo Krit on June 6, 2005 10:39 AMI have been reading this blog every day of the trial and had hoped for a common sense "we the people" outcome. I feel bad for WA residents. My advice, give up and get out of there - it will only get worse in CA, OR, and WA.
I moved to Houston, Texas this spring from California, precisely becasue I could no longer stand the dishonest, duplicitous, and MEGA-EXPENSIVE government owned by lefties.
For my move, I sold a crappy little 900 sq. ft. house on a very busy street corner in a Los Angeles burb for $500,000. I bought a 4,000 sq. ft. house on 10 acres with a pool, spa, and sauna for $200,000!
Houston Rocks Red!
Posted by: Will on June 6, 2005 10:39 AMFirst, I'll have to wait for a more careful reading of the decision, but it seems as though there was, in fact, a nearly impossible hurdle to jump to explicitly identify which way individual votes went. This is something I'll be following far more closely. As it is, I find it difficult to imagine how fraud could ever be demonstrated.
Second, I suspect the R's knew this would be the case, but went to trial anyway to, as someone else pointed out, win the PR battle. It's clear at this point that King County swung the election, the counting was suspect, the reconciliation was suspect, and to any reasonable person the actual outcome is, in fact, unknown. Of course, once KC was able to get their hands on actual ballots everyone knew they'd never let a Republican win, so that was a foregone conclusion.
So, in large part they probably accomplished what they set out to do: Show that KC installed Gregoire as governor. Her polls seem to be reflecting that.
Posted by: Frank Black on June 6, 2005 10:39 AMMake sure to have all your dead relatives sign twice!
Posted by: rick D on June 6, 2005 10:39 AMWhat is your take on the law here? Bridges did admit that the margin of error was much larger than the margin of victory. He basically said that that isn't enough reason under WA state law for him to do anything.
So what's your opinion of this law? Is it fair to honest voters?
How much certainty do you have that Gregoire won honestly?
Posted by: Bostonian on June 6, 2005 10:40 AMBased on the law as written it's hard to fault the judge for his decision. He did make at least one ridiculous assertion on his part though, such as his finding that a male felon would most likely vote for a male candidate. Where did that come from? He said you couldn't judge how a felon would vote based on precinct, but you could based on sex? Give me a break.
Posted by: Tucker on June 6, 2005 10:40 AMAs for the smuggness of the trolls, I just offer that winning graciously is as just as much as an art as losing graciously. And before we travel down the slippery slope of "Rossi shouldn't have brought this election contest", I say wrong, the result was simply too close to call especially in light of evidence of illegal voting. And a 133 vote victory does not a mandate make, so I would say that the WA is changing.
Personally, and I know I'm probably alone here in this, is that I wish there wouldn't be an appeal. I realize why it is necessary, but I would prefer to move on and get down to the real work -- starting with getting Ron Sims OUT. There's the key to all it. IMHO.
Posted by: Emily on June 6, 2005 10:41 AMSnuffy
Posted by: snuffy on June 6, 2005 10:41 AMThat is EXACTLY what I plan on doing. Free reign!
Posted by: Rich on June 6, 2005 10:41 AMI respect what you're trying to say.
But "good for the democracy"? Where in hell do you get that?
Why is it good for a democracy to have *zero* accountability for the people in charge of elections?
No, I'm sorry...I've no room left for compromise with the democratic party. They will never get another vote from me in my lifetime, don't care if the GOP puts up Bozo The Clown.
Posted by: steve_dog on June 6, 2005 10:42 AMRon Simms, what do you think? we could re-hometrain everybody.
Posted by: who'dathunk? on June 6, 2005 10:42 AMThe fight, however, was very worthwhile. Here is why:
1) There was a slim chance the election could have been invalidated. That was certainly worthwhile.
2) If the case had not happened, much of what is now known by the public would not have seen the light of day. Documenting the ineptitude and corruption was worthwhile.
3) You must realize that the Dems were certainly surprised that the election was even close in a Blue state like WA. This opportunity to highlight the problems (i.e., "theft") would not have been available if the election had not been close. The Repubs had to take this opportunity to go to court and let the evidence see the light of day.
I agree with some posters here that this was more about fighting the good fight in a likely loosing battle so as to gain ground and ultimate victory in the war.
We have won much ground on the national level, and as many say, a backlash against liberals and Dems is simmering and may reach a boil in the years to come. That backlash will be felt in 2006 and 2008 in this state.
I applaud the Repubs/Rossi for all the work to bring this case despite tough odds. The R party knew this was important to the long-term roadmap for success.
Tom in Bellevue
Posted by: Tom on June 6, 2005 10:43 AMI propose that we start the dismantling brick-by-brick beginning with Komisar Sims! King County should get a taste of citizen revolt and repulsion of the electile dysfunction that allows illegal votes to be counted.
Undermine the Queen at the grass roots, one stooge at a time. This will open the next governor race in 2008 to be waged on a fair field.
I will throw my time and energy into the removal of Ron Sims...this needs to be the large staged demonstration response to the court loss. Tactical strikes against the foes in KING COUNTY who screwed up the entire state election. Do not let them face the public without constant reminder of their acts.
Posted by: Elvis is the King County on June 6, 2005 10:44 AMWe need to get some R's into the big house soon
Make sure you change your voting registration IMMEDIATELY to vote at your local precinct... DO NOT MAIL in your ballot... CHANGE BACK NOW!!! or risk having your ballot lost or misplaced...
CHANGE YOUR STATUS NOW. MARK "NO" in the ONGOING ABSENTEE REQUEST
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/pdf/VoterForm_20040803.pdf
I also applaud Rossi's team for doing this. Otherwise, the full extent of KCE's shenanigans would not be known.
As it is, the public has become much better educated about the election process and can monitor the appointed officials much better.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 6, 2005 10:45 AMFirst, the judge's ruling was partially based on there being an inadequate legal basis to rule on the Republican's behalf—the language was unclear. Legislation must be drafted to create a more failsafe quality control system for the procedure we use to conduct and certify elections. The current system is rife with loopholes; some might say purposefully. The nation is putting more political and judicial energy into making professional sports a level playing field than in the foundation of our political system. In a free society, the electing of representatives is crucial to it’s legitimacy.
The Republican Party must also energize to draft an army of volunteers of every stripe and strata to do work for the party in preparation for the next election. I stated earlier that the people need to be able to react to "discrepancies" real-time. Obviously it won't be enough to find out about "errors" through discovery in a legal proceeding. Think of it as you might a coach's challenge in NFL football. Throwing the red flag during the election may be the only way to stop Dems from using this ruling to turn this state into a turn-of-the-century political machine.
This process has consumed a lot of energy but it can’t be over. In the next few years we are certainly going to be voting on a lot of levies, bond issues, and other spending related ballot choices. The Dems are already in juggernaut mode in Olympia and this ruling is almost certainly going to embolden them. This is no time to sulk back into the malaise of a ruling-induced depression. No matter what the basis for the judge’s ruling, the polls seem to indicate that the people of Washington State smell something rotten in the way this last election was managed. King County voters may have no way to hold Ken Logan and his staff accountable, but that’s the great thing about our system of government—Ron Sims is next in line on the accountability ladder. Every voting opportunity is going to give Republicans--and the masses of disgusted independent voters--an opportunity to send a message to the Dems. They will get the message sooner or later.
It seems the voters need some how-to info.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 6, 2005 10:48 AMSeriously though, What's more important? Having your candidate win? or letting the law of the land prevail?
For all yr. (Republican's) talk about "activist judges" you all should be quite willing to be accepting this.
Oh, why don't you guys draft Tim Sheldon into the party? We'd love to be rid of him.
Love,
Big Biff the Democrat Dawg
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 10:48 AMAs a proud Ohioan, first of all, my condolences to all of you who have to deal with this "traversty o'justis".
Having said that, yes, let's clean out Ohio... it's run by nothing but RINOs (except in Youngstown). Kick 'em all out and put some real conservatives in office!
Posted by: Snowy Owl on June 6, 2005 10:52 AMStill don't get it, do you? The law did NOT prevail because voter fraud turned an election. We were disenfranchised.
The law said the KC elections people had to do several things in specific ways, and they did not do them! They falsified reports, enter votes that should not have been entered, etc, etc, etc. No, the law of the land - honest elections - did NOT prevail.
Posted by: Shannon K on June 6, 2005 10:56 AMWe know two things for sure:
1) KCE Counted the Larry Phillips absentees which pushed Gregoire into the lead.
2) KCE did now count a number of other absentees.
We don't know for absolute sure that those uncounted ballots would have swayed the election back to Rossi. But in selectively counting the ballots, the partisan KCE folks managed to achieve a result that matched the party who appointed them to their positions.
Anyone want to start drafting an intitiative? Time to change the law to both better handle negligent behavior of election officials, and to make it harder to vote illegally in the first place.
It's certainly not going to be anything that the current legislature changes.
Posted by: Jeff B. on June 6, 2005 10:59 AMSo it's back to business as usual. The only way the people of Washington State can affect the status quo is through the initiative. Will I-900 and I-912 win? I guess we will determine that.
So, King County voters how are YOU going to clean up YOUR elections department so the the votes of the rest of the State have some meaning?
As for the suggestion that 134 illegal voters should have been deposed, who would believe a thing they said? I would guess 80 to 90 percent voted for Illegit but would claim even under oath, since no one can prove how they voted, they voted for Rossi. That would simply be an exercise in futility.
Posted by: JC Bob on June 6, 2005 10:59 AMhttp://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=fraud
Now that isn't the legal definition of course, but the legal definition is, if I recall correctly, even more stringent and definite about what is and is not fraud. Now unless the Republicans have proof that Democrats acted to stuff the ballot box or hide Rossi votes, they've got no basis to challenge the election last year. Those are examples of fraud. Not mistakes and/or errors.
Posted by: Will on June 6, 2005 11:01 AMBesides it ain't over till the fat lady sings...and she is on a diet today!
Posted by: Terry Clark C on June 6, 2005 11:02 AMI am confident, given the type of discussion engaged on this blog, that had Rossi won by 129 votes, that none of this discussion of fraud and incompetence would have been pursued; and that is disingenuous.
This was an historically close election. Nothing more and nothing less. In human endeavors, there is always human error. Would a revote have satisfied you? What if either candidate had "won" the revote by a similar margin? What would that have shown us? There would still have been errors, as there are in any election of this size.
What really disappoints me in this discussion is that several on this board are now advocating specific fraud in future elections. I'd never advocate or condone that.
I said on this board prior to the final recount that I'd support a Gregoire concession even had she lost by a single vote. I meant it then, and I mean it now.
In nearly 3 millions vote cast, you will find irregularities. That doesn't constitute fraud; it doesn't even tell us anything about where those votes ultimately went, and that's all the judge was saying.
Anyway, if you consider yourself a patriot, then you'll cease this hysterical witch hunt and seek to work with and understand those who hold differing political views than your own. Building stronger fortresses around your positions will not help our State become better and stronger.
I say again, lets work together, not against each other.
Posted by: Timothy Killian on June 6, 2005 11:04 AM I couldn't believe it. The judge virtually parroted the Democratic talking points. I know that the Dems are gonna be quoting his "no evidence" line ad nausium for the next 4 years- it'll be tommorrows headline in the newspapers. I just can't believe it.
As many have pointed out, the level of evidence required to contest the election makes the contest statute meaningless. Consider:
1: To deduct illegal votes you must have the illegal voters testify how they voted. Except the judge seems to have forgotten the 5th Amendment, which protects a person from making incriminating statements- and last time I checked voting illegally is a crime. That's not all, what about the right to secret ballot? Do we just through that out the window?
2: "no evidence of misconduct" by election officials? You had election officials admit, on the stand, that they falsified the reconciliation reports upon which the election was certified. That's not misconduct?!?
3: Finally, and most damningly in my opinion. The judge ruled:
A: The reconciliation process is "the one check" on either ballot stuffing, or the removal of ballots.
B: King County could not reconcile the number of votes with the number of voters. That there were at least 800+ more ballots than voters.
C: However, there is "no evidence" of ballot stuffing, despite the fact that there has never been given an reasonable alternate explination- just mysterious unspecified "errors"
What this ruling has done, is to make it so that, as a practical matter, to contest an election, you must have either videotape or eyewitness testimony of someone stuffing ballot boxes, or removing ballots from ballot boxes. If this is the case, why do we even bother with reconciliation?
To top it of, the judge didn't even give King County a "stern talking to". He found that they were "lax" and "unconcerned" with errors, but there was no editorializing about how their behavior had damaged voter confidence in the election, or admonishions demanding they improve their conduct so as to prevent this from happening in the future. To put it bluntly, the judge told the 50% of Washington State who voted for Rossi to go to hell.
Posted by: Sparrow on June 6, 2005 11:05 AM
It was indeed an honest election, your man lost by 129 (133 now) votes. Go call Sammy Boy Reed and he'll tell you the same thing. Is King County a big county? Yes. Do they have more people there than anywhere else? Yes. Is there elections department perhaps... "mismanaged" to put it lightly? Yes. But was there fraud, or the deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain? No. Screwups, lost ballots, but at the end of the day, when the ballots were counted, there was a winner, as per the law of elections.
When you lose, that doesn't mean you were robbed.
(aside from Florida 2k of course, but that's a whole different story).
Until next time Shannon K,
Love,
Big Biff the Democrat Dawg
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 11:07 AMThe lesson republicans need to learn most is humility. Face the fact: the republican Far Right is wrong.
Posted by: Artie on June 6, 2005 11:08 AMI can already hear the popping of corks and the clinking of champagne glasses at the KC elections office, can't you?
Posted by: Rightly Cynical on June 6, 2005 11:08 AMPass an initiative that:
1) invalidates all existing voter registration (wipe the slate clean)
2) mandates that when registering to vote (in person) you must bring PHOTO ID & PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP! (notarized birth certificate or certificate of naturalization)
3) mandatory 100% criminal records check
4) automatic reporting to elections database of any felony conviction
5) audio & video surveliance of all polling places & elections counting centers.
I also think we should eliminate absentee ballots for anyone unless they can prove need, but since I know this won't fly I'll leave it out for now.
Lets face it. One of the Dems core constuencies are people too lazy & irresponsible to put in this much effort. Another is illegal aliens. A third are criminals who don't want to face tough sentances for their crimes. A fourth is people too stupid to figure out a butterfly ballot.
This will eliminate all 4 constiuencies in one fell swoop!
Posted by: Bob on June 6, 2005 11:09 AMAnd for those who have whined about how it's now "time to leave the state", don't let the Columbia River soak your sorry ass on the way out.
Why don't you take Tim Eyman with you and start your own whiny ass commune of selfish losers somewhere far, far away.
Posted by: Sore Winner on June 6, 2005 11:09 AMBut, no.
It's now clear to me that all Government needs in order to function is democrats.
Posted by: Useless on June 6, 2005 11:09 AMThe lesson republicans need to learn most is humility. Face the fact: the republican Far Right is wrong.
Awww...does the cute 'lil troll want a cracker?
Posted by: Slublog on June 6, 2005 11:14 AMOh man are you crazy?
I mean, having a REPUBLICAN company remove an ass-load of people from the voter-rolls who happened to share a first or last name with actual felons, who were predominantly BLACKIES, or how all the votes weren't counted, etc, etc.
Florida 2000 = Criminal Shit.
Washington 2004 = Really close, but following the SOP.
The elections process finally has the chance to be cleaned up if King County residents have the courage to do something.
It will require that the Washington State Republican Party begin to acquire some intestinal fortitude and stand up for what is right.
Step # 1. Depose the corrupt Sims (Daly)administration.
Step # 2. Refuse to re-elect so called republicans like Sam Reed just because they claim to be republican.
If we cannot succeed at these types of goals, then you can kiss goodbye to fair elections and look forward to "Chicago style" elections in the future.
I want to see people like Chris Vance stand up for the ideals of the republican party and not compromise. I truly believe that there is already a majority of like minded individuals that disapprove of the way the liberal democrats currently run this state.
Posted by: jaybo on June 6, 2005 11:16 AMWhat a farce. Republican, the party of higher standards? Hardly. Follow the money - the root of all evil (it's said) - and you'll find the republican party leadership cronyism, dirty tricks, insider corruption and backroom deals, deceit, mudslinging and character assassination, lies, war mongers and war profiteers, big business crushing small business to create monopolies, holier-than-thou christian fundamentalists committing theft, practicing opulent apathy and living in denial.
The lesson republicans need to learn most is humility. Face the fact: the republican Far Right is wrong.
Awww...does the cute 'lil troll want a cracker?
Posted by: Slublog on June 6, 2005 11:16 AMUgh.
Posted by: Slublog on June 6, 2005 11:17 AMMy advice is to let the lawyers look at this. If they decide not to appeal, we should not make the 2004 election the centerpiece of our campaigns in 2005 (for Irons), 2006 (against Cantwell) and 2008.
Things are not going to get better in this state. Her position will not improve. But bitterness will not win us the 2008 election. Let's keep it to ourselves and win on the issues. The closeness of 2004 election has made us a credible alternative and the people are listening. With Rossi, McKenna, and hopefully Irons we will have something we have not had in Washington for a long time--a solid bench.
Posted by: B2 on June 6, 2005 11:18 AM* 1,678 people (person?) voted illegally, yet a 129 vote difference that determined the election stands! Hmmm...seems the outcome of the election is a bit blurry!!!
*King County's election division needs to be gutted and overhauled--if not eliminated
*WA's state election laws desperately need revision (if 1,678 does not blur the 129 vote difference a little bit)
*individual votes do not count (more votes than voters?)
*illegitimate voters will never be held accountable for breaking the law
*there exist no repercussions for punishing these 'illegal' voters; why enforce ANY laws???
*why vote in future elections if illegitimate votes will dilute the legitimate votes that are cast?
***How is it that Iraq can get it right in a single election and this state can't get it right with a 120+ year election history???
Sad day for fair and just elections. Sad day for the state of Washington.
This coming from a member of the Armed Forces who was denied her right to vote while serving overseas in 1998 thanks to negligence of a county clerk in Texas. Nothing happened to resolve the problems then (after I elevated them to my senator) and looks like nothing has resolved the problems now. I won't even bother to hold my breath to see the problems resolved in the future.
Why not just let EVERYBODY vote in US elections--regardless of their status/citizenship??? Seems to be happening as it is anyway...
Beth
Posted by: Beth on June 6, 2005 11:19 AMrotf! Yer not posta feedum!
Posted by: rolling eyes on June 6, 2005 11:19 AMDino would freakin' love to be Senator, but he made his deal, and it backfired on him.
Wait for the Vance/Rossi falling out to occur in about three.... two....
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 11:19 AM1. The King County elections office needs to be swept clean. We need to take advantage of the current public anger over the whole election mess and work to bring about change now. It is up to us to keep this issue in the news. You can count on the big local media to try to just let this whole thing die down while the Democrats hope that the voters have short memories. The trial is over, but election reform has just begun. Good-bye, Dean Logan and company. We also need to respond by volunteering work at polling places on election days.
2. We also need to vote Ron Sims out of office this fall. Most Democrats will likely just keep voting for him, but perhaps we can boot him out. It starts with providing a good Republican candidate who is an alternative to King Ron. Focus on the positive potential of our new candidate while pointing out that it is time for change in King County.
3. Let's repeal the new gas tax by supporting the new initiative and getting it passed. If the Democrats in Olympia insist on passing new taxes and other ridiculous laws, we will at times have to respond with initiatives that look out for the people of Washington. Contact your local representatives in Olympia and let them know what you want. I just moved from Redmond to West Seattle, and my Washington state senator, Erik Poulsen is going to hearing from me. I read his recent newsletter, and I am already ticked off at him. I may live in Seattle, but I'm not going to just sit there and suffer.
4. Do not give up or lose hope! By working together, we can try to bring about much needed change. Do not be distracted or dismayed by the taunting and gloating of the opposition. Yes, it is going to be hard, but it is not impossible.
Thank you to all my conservative friends here at soundpolitics. I am anticipating future victories for freedom, integrity and the will of the people of King County and Washington state.
More importantly, how is it that while we tolerate liberals’ strong opinions in civil debate, they refuse to respect ours, and refer to us as extremists? It's just sad.
Posted by: Jennifer on June 6, 2005 11:21 AMMy guess is that the GOP will now weigh the advantages/disadvantages of an appeal. If my supposition is correct that they never concerned about trying to win this case, they may make the judgement that an appeal would be counterproductive to their ultimate aim of winning public opinion "votes". Time will tell. I would be shocked if the Supremes overturn Bridge's ruling.
One thing this ruling and the reaction to it points out is that it is critical for thinking people to turn to a variety of sources to get their news. I disagree with much of what I read on this site, but read nonetheless - it is important for me to get as complete a picture as possible to make up my mind.
Posted by: Eddie on June 6, 2005 11:22 AMI thought there would be a little quiet reflection on this site after Judge Bridges made it clear that there was no fraud, no cheating, and that even if he had accepted proportional analysis, it would have favored Gregoire...,
But, heck, this is Sound Politics, why assume a moment of sanity when paranoia reigns.
Now we have people calling for actual fraud and the use of guns. We have people calling Judge Bridges a commie just because they disagree with him. I'm just waiting for the calls for a recall of Sam Reed and his overthrow. And how long until you turn on Chris Vance (although, in that case you have a reason since he perpetuated this farce upon you).
Well, give credit where credit is due, we finally have some proof of actual fraud, and its here with the wingnuts of Sound Politics. I just hope Deborah doesn't turn you in to her fed friends (titter...).
If there is any chance for your party, it will be when you turn your anger on those who deserve it, those who lied to you and distorted the truth for the sake of PR and of appealing to the worse of your emotions. People like the minnow, Dale Foreman, Chris Vance, John Carlson and the others who would rather lie to you than deal with the real concerns that this case raised.
And assuming that there are some of you here who are starting to realise that the bias here isn't helping you, try horsesass.org or alsoalso (dot) typepad (dot)com (strange, the minnows website considers competing websites "questionable material", but not horsesass, go figure) amongst others. Heck, they have their biases, but at least they get things right. Expose yourself to some alternate views. Hey, you just might learn something (like what the word "fraud" means).
Posted by: JDB on June 6, 2005 11:22 AMI think a Federal investigation is warranted now in light of the Judges findings....
I expected this outcome. The judge is just another corrupt Democrat as will be the WA Supreme Court.
What makes anyone think this wont be the same old story election after election? The Dems have just installed a permanent government via Fraud and Corruption. They just got a big pat on the back and in no uncertain terms were told to "Go for it!" Watch what happens now that they are invincible, the rights you have are quickly going to disppear, taxes will dramticaly rise and the liberal agenda will be advanced yet again. Its truly a sad day for this state and this country.
Gregoire. You see, the person with the most inky fingers wins. That's how it works here too. The most ballots wins. If you'd like to have more simple things explained to you, please check out www.mylightswitchistoocomplicated.com .
Love, Big Biff the Democrat Dawg
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 11:29 AMBridges did the best he thought he could do with the laws he had to work with.
While I disagree I see multiple cause in the law to overturn the election. However on matters of law I differ to Judges Bridges.
While the dems control we will see no meaningful election reform.
Our recourse is the ballot box overwhelming through each and every current elected politician out of office from dog catcher to governor until:
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
It time for the citizen to regain control of Olympia by ballot, referendum, and initiative.
Posted by: JCM on June 6, 2005 11:30 AMSound Pol., great job in any case. Shark, you're #1. Just mailed my "tip jar" contribution to you. Money well spent. Vigilence is key.
Aesop's fable moral: FUBAR big time with your election counting job and you are rewarded with yet another payckeck. When is Dean Logan's book coming out? Put it right next to O.J's on the store shelf.
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on June 6, 2005 11:32 AMGive me a diet Coke with that double cheeseburger and order of deep fried onion rings. Yeah, that will help. Look, I'm eating healthy, and my vote counts!!
To all you liberal folks out there celebrating and thinking you won, enjoy your moment. Remember Pearl Harbor? It may take a while, and you can gloat a while, but eventually, we will kick your donkey ass to the curb. Even the French eventually rejected the liberal elite (voting non! to the EU Constitution). Ahh, springtime in Paris. Olympia, and DC, in due time.
Never forget, and never sit in the back of the election bus, ever again!
Posted by: duhh on June 6, 2005 11:32 AM
Just a warning.
Those CREEPS count heavily on a short attention of the voters, and their mind-f**k noise machines try to encourage that. F**k 'em! NEVER forget. STAND UP, KEEP FIGHTING!
F**K you Rossi! Now get over it, LOSER!
Maybe we'll even get to hear some whiny quote from Rossi? LOSER!
Rossi was a sore loser and this is the right decision. I wonder if the Repugs will appeal it.
Those are all from a thread on the topic at Democratic Underground. Quiet and reflective?
You be the judge.
Posted by: Slublog on June 6, 2005 11:34 AMI am disappointed in the ruling because I believe that it does make an election contest not just difficult, but impossible. If anyone other than election officials or the candidates stuff the ballot box, then the standard appears to be that you must have the name of the stuffer(s) and have depositions on how they voted. They can lie about how they voted and there is absolutely no way to prove otherwise (the actual ballot). If you cannot discover the stuffer(s), then the stuffing is valid and “legal”. I find it incredible that state law actually allows this scenario to be permissible.
I am also disappointed in his dismissal of the proportional deduction. The disappointing aspect was his comment that it is not widely used or accepted. How is that so many states have used it and even Congress uses it and this constitutes “not widely used or accepted”? He may be correct about the bias of the data subsets, etc., but I saw zero evidence that the interveners method was used anywhere in the U.S. to resolve election issues.
What the people need from government are laws that close the loopholes that allow people to obviously vote in a manner contrary to our state constitution.
Proof of citizenship. - Valid ID for registration, not the “honor” system. Purge the voter database and reregister (Amend Have Anyone Vote Act, if necessary)
Proof of restoration of civil rights (felons) - Court decrees with regards to felons should be part of the election system.
Proof of life - The election system should be constantly updated with information of deceased voters.
Create penalties for elections officials (at all levels) who fail to follow the law and the WACs.
Clear up ambiguities shown by this court case – voter crediting!
Judge Bridges ruling did not do much to discourage the cheaters; I fear they are emboldened by his decision. His comment about voters handling the situation doesn’t help. I live in Snohomish County and KC has had a disproportionate impact on us and there is nothing I can do to help solve things in KC. Besides, KC voters can only vote for or against Ron Simms, (and perhaps some county council members), but they don’t have a direct say over the elections division in the form of an elected County Auditor.
Initiatives or Referendums may be a way to address some of these problems, but the cheaters still have clear access to the system. We need to put pressure on the legislature to resolve this. As long as meaningful election reform is ignored and only a new coat of paint is added, very few in the state will feel comfort and confidence in the accuracy of our elections systems.
Posted by: Jack on June 6, 2005 11:34 AMSee above. Rossi will not run for Senate. Vance will. Along with McCaw, Randy Tate, and maybe one or two others. That is unless the Karl Rove/Elizabeth Dole contingent has their way and there's no primary.
It's not like Cantwell is a sitting duck. If she got 70% of the votes that Murray got, well... she'll be fine. What's George Nethercutt doing these days? Oh thats right, phat lobbyist checks on K Street.
Welcome to the end of the Republican threat in major Wa-State races.
Love,
Big Biff
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 11:34 AMFact: In King County precincts where votes were "found" Gregoire won all but one, in precincts where votes were "lost" Rossi won all but one. How this is "no evidence" is beyond me. It is so statistically improbable that I have a better chance of winning Lotto 5 times.
Its obvious something isn't quite right there and I think to say there is "no evidence" is a bit of a stretch on his part.
Look, this isn't the end of the world. Its one governor's race, and Rossi will be back.
Posted by: Marc on June 6, 2005 11:35 AMLLLLLLOSERS! The more you blather the more jokes I have at work about GOP whiners. Thanks!
Posted by: Slublog on June 6, 2005 11:39 AMPLEASE READ.
I commend Stefan for being the main catalyst that brought the extent of this scandal to light. (the mainstream media WILL NOT DO IT for us)
I Beg and plead to him and to the rest of us here to keep this issue alive!
The judge has given this issue up to us the voters to 'fix this mess'.
Unfortunately, most washingtonians don't follow these issues the way we have, if at all....
So we must make sure they know and that we use this to help restore fairness to WA., and to serve "crow" back to those trolls here so happy to post about our defeat at the hands of the corrupt.
I ask Stefan and all of us to stay here and brainstorm as to what to do. (maybe we must rule ourselves by initiative)
Shall we start with a recall of fraudoire/and or sims, or some type of initiative establishing new law for elections.
or some other vague IDEAS.
1)Photo ID to vote?
2)New standards of verifying registrations?
3)A Requirement that election director MUST be elected, or that must be a bi-partisan election board for each county. With rep approved by corresponding party.
4)Establishing a MUCH different standard that courts can/must follow in this type of situation.
5) YOUR IDEAS HERE!!
Let's put our heads together and take action...and by this action call attention to the fraud and the fraudulent, and that Seattle, King County and the Democratic House/Senate can't be trusted to correct it, nor do they WANT to correct it.
I Ask Stefan, can we establish a thread (stickey'ed at the top perhaps) to discuss these issues and decide ways to take action. I ask everyone else, lets not forget and stay tuned.....and active.
Let's teach the corrupt and the trolls a lesson. I don't think we can rely on others to do this, as they are paying less attention than us (thx to mmm).
What do you all think?
Scott
Either do without or do without till you can get to Oregon.
Personally, everytime I decide NOT to buy something or I defer buying something I'm going to drop the dems in power a little note.
I had my eye on a nice little $600 Riccar vacuum cleaner, but the old Hoover will do nicely for a while longer.
That's ok Biff, I'v got mine too!
See my post at 10:14 AM
"Maybe it's not so bad? We did just get permission to cast votes for our dead grandparents & to start stuffing ballot boxes! And I fully intend to. The judge did say that cheating is ok, right?
We should all start by volunteering to work at our local polling places. lol. Don't worry, we'll win the next one. *wink wink*"
And then we'll say, we learned it all from the masters!
Love,
El Big Biff de la Magnifico
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 11:47 AMDale, don't lose sight of what we can do. In the face of an unjust decision, we the people have the duty, the responsibility, and the right to live free. Read the founding documents of this nation, examine the writings of the founding fathers, and realize the inherent nature of our rights -- our God-given freedom. Then educate each individual you meet, that they are created with certain inalienable rights, and that we must remember our heritage if we are to continue as a free nation. The answer to injustice is not disallusionment, but renewal and diligence of purpose.
Stand up and be counted. (once)
Posted by: Daniel Kauffman on June 6, 2005 11:49 AMAnd Judge Bridges says there's no fraud?
This state is going down the crapper.
Posted by: Brigadier on June 6, 2005 11:51 AM1. Sam Reeds testimony about his office's findings in earlier audits that (according to statements made on radio shows), that the procedures and system that the elections office was doing in earlier elections could amount to an election being thrown-out if they did not change the way (in accordance with Law). He also (correct me if I am wrong) stated that most of those requested procedures were not corrected for this last election.
2. Where was the expert testimony that machine recount is considerably more reliable and accurate that a hand count?
3. Where was all the testimony/dispositions from all of the callers that stated that they actually observed infractions to the process/law in both the election and the recounts. The fact that provisional ballots were purposely (versus mistakenly) inserted directly into voting machines, mishandling of ballots by election workers, ballots being lost then found, ballots that were not secure in contradiction to state law, the testimony from Dems canvassing workers who went out to verify ballot signatures from Dems and not Republicans and the caller who stated that she personally observed one voter who was casting a ballot at as many polling places as she could. Where are all these people now?
It appears to me that the legal team put all of their eggs in one basket - proportional analysis. There should have been much, much, more emphasis placed on the above items.
Based on what I heard this morning from the Judge, I do not believe Rossi has a chance in the State Supreme Court. Almost all of the decisions from the judgment came as a result of a lack of "evidence" that Rossi would have received more votes than Gargoyle. If the Supreme court follows the same guidelines/law that Judge Bridges based his decision on, Rossi doesn't have a chance.
It's too bad, because I don't think this state can take 3 more years of this Governor. Any chance of a "recall" election? Also, where is the Federal Election Commission that should be investigating this atrocity?
Only one more comment: It does not appear that Washington has a strong GOP party leadership. The point being is how the Gas Tax increase got approved in the legislature and only because several "Republican" members changed sides and voted for it. WHERE WAS THE GOP PARTY CHAIRMAN? It appears that he has lost control of the party.
GO ROSSI
Ron
Posted by: Ron on June 6, 2005 12:00 PMThe obvious answer might be to cast an illegal vote in king county which this judge has validated. Unfortunately that won't happen, you see i am not a liberal democrat!
Posted by: ace on June 6, 2005 12:00 PMThen the Hypoc-Rossi begins...
Same here. It's a mere hop skip and a jump to keep my money out of her grubby vote stealing hands.
I'll make money here though, selling my bumper stickers. But I won't spend it here.
My tush hurts Lucy, What do you and that bad Mayor of Spokane do for sore pooper?
I never held out hope for a just ruling, because of how the system is rigged. But it'd be nice to see a thoughtful analysis of why the decision was profound, and not merely predicatable.
After all, how often are modern judges feeling constrained by democratic rules and legislation? They ignore, overturn, and stand them on their heads all the time.
Cordially..
Posted by: Rick on June 6, 2005 12:04 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:05 PMYou know what taxes do? They build the roads you drive on. They drive the buses your kids take to school. They pay for the cop to arrest the pervert sex offender next door. They are how the world works.
If you want to be stupid and try to avoid paying the unavoidable, go ahead. But don't bitch when you get in a wreck because of a pothole or dangerous intersection, or you have to take your kid to school or the sex offender next door comes peering into your yard.
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 12:05 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:05 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMAnd just think, I was going to make a bunch of money selling my "Re-Defeat Rossi" bumper stickers....
HA HA!
Posted by: Rossi Is A Crybaby on June 6, 2005 12:06 PMThat's because you've probably spent too much time reading the wrong print, i.e. the so-called "liberal bias" in the "mainstream" media. Serious allegations of vote rigging and fraud were extensively documented -- but not extensively reported in the US media. You'd need to consult the British press (the BBC did report extensively on this) instead. Try looking at Greg Palast's website (www.gregpalast.com) -- he's one of the few real American investigative journalists left.
Now before pulling out the "Bush-hating-liberal" card, you would also need to read some of the things he dug up on Clinton.
Listen to some clips from the Judge's ruling in my podcast today. Give it a listen if you get a minute. Bridges is the lead story today.
Posted by: Charlie Quidnunc on June 6, 2005 12:07 PMCAN WE SAY JUDGE "COWARD"?
ALL THE MORE REASON TO SIGN UP TO GET SIGNATURES FOR THE NO NEW GAS TAX INITIATIVE!
Posted by: PS on June 6, 2005 12:08 PMEwwww! Get out of our site! Yuck!
Just gross!
Posted by: Deborah on June 6, 2005 12:09 PMGregoire is selected to be the Governor of Washington with 129 votes, while the judge today acknowledged that close to 1700 votes were cast illegally, primarily due to felons the inpetitude of King County elections officials in the most Democratic county in Washington state. And Gregoire and the MSM are claiming her mandate to ride roughshod all over the wishes of the citizens of this state.
I think the Democrats and Judge Bridges may have just turned Washington red.
Posted by: JRR on June 6, 2005 12:18 PMThe judge said:
Illegal votes - no problem
More votes than voters - no problem
Vote counts fixed without reconciliation - no problem
How then can voting change the system? Apparantly the game is now down to who can perpetrate the most fraud since validating fraud is impossible and inconsquential.
You can be sure of one thing; this decision just went into every democrat playbook for Election '08!
Posted by: Baynative on June 6, 2005 12:18 PMI think it's quite fair to complain that hundreds of voterless ballots were counted--illegally, I might add.
It's nice to see how the Left loves democracy.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 6, 2005 12:20 PMhe gave it significant regard and comment. Regarding proportional analysis, Bridges said it was "assumptions which determined the outcome." And he's absolutely correct.
I don't understand why......Doesn't make sense to me.. I'll have to ponder this awhile..
He followed the law and the science.
Posted by: JDM on June 6, 2005 12:20 PMAs for sending a message, I could not agree more about the NO NEW GAS TAX initiative. I've already made my donation via that website.
While I will continue to vote here (legally) like I always have, I will not go as far to say that I will move somewhere else because of all this. This is where we choose to make our home and we do it because we love to live and work here. Moving out is akin to giving up and there's plenty of fight left in this dog. I hope this does stir up all those who did not vote last election and I hope Rossi does give it another go in 2008. Let's do whatever we can to encourage people to get out and vote legally in the next election - I'm sure we can do a better job than what the angry Democrats did in Florida in 2004.
Posted by: Palouse on June 6, 2005 12:21 PM1. There were 10 times the number of PROVEN illegal ballots than there was the margin of victory. DOES NOT MATTER.
2. Specific statutes in Washington law were not followed (and ADMITTED in court.) DOES NOT MATTER!
3. Election officials falsified return information and were condoned by their superiors, also ADMITTED in court. DOES NOT MATTER.
4. The law (W.A.C.) has specific remedies for breaking the legal requirements set forth for a legitimate election. DOES NOT MATTER.
Therefore, I have to conclude that it DOES NOT MATTER what my vote is nor does it matter whether or not I follow the law in making that vote.
Besides my own obvious disappointment, I have to ask the following question:
What do I tell my kids about fairness and superiority of the American voting system and the "fact" that we are a nation ruled by law and not by fiat? They see with a child's eye the obvious lies and illegalities and have to wonder if what I tell them is a lie as well. After all, I told them to trust the system and they saw how well that works.
I am truly saddened that our state has no remedy for obvious deviations from an honest election process. All the talk about "next time" means very little when you have no faith that your voice counts for anything.
A sad day for Washington, and a sad day for the nation as a whole.
Posted by: Elmo on June 6, 2005 12:22 PMBut having said that, don't you just love how justices typically rule in favor of the liberal establishment (be it an "elected" official or a liberal social policy) by pleading a limitation of its judicial power, but when traditional or conservative policies come under review, justices more often than not excercise an overstepping judicial activism?
Why is it that highly-suspicious elections which favor Democratic candidates or controversial liberal social prescriptions are sacrosanct but conservative causes are always being reviewed with a very real threat of being overturned on the whim of some judicial tyrant? Hmmmm, me detects a rather insidious double standard here. You voters who really care about honest and fair elections in Washington just got flipped off by Judge Bridges. But don't despair, you can always console yourselves that you didn't suffer even greater harm than did Terri Shiavo under Florida's Judge Greer.
But I'll leave any conspiracy theories to the moonbats on the left since they are far more adept at coming up with insanities that speak of a Bu$Hitler/Haliburton rape of Iraq or some KKKarl Rove political voodoo which is causing Howard Dean to go slowly insane.
Posted by: Hankmeister on June 6, 2005 12:22 PMThanks for making my point for me. Like my dad always used to tell me
"If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance
Baffle 'em with bullshit"
You paid attention really well.
Try thinking for a change. I know the sequence of events, you mental midget. I asked how a 240 vote difference can be a tie, yet a 129 vote difference is a mandate.
I know it's hard, but try to explain that.
Posted by: Brigadier on June 6, 2005 12:28 PMCan't you stick to the subject. How the heck did Bush get involved in this? All you lefty libs can do is default back to Bush/War crimes/Florida 2000, start snivelling like a 4 year old brat, and call names.
Grow up guys, deal with the issues - oh, that's right you can't, because then you would see how wrong you are and what an idiot you've been all your life.
How does 240 votes equal a tie, yet 129 votes is a mandate?
Posted by: Brigadier on June 6, 2005 12:35 PMFrom day 1 he stated what the burden of proof was going to be, and it seemed insanely high to me then. Turns out I was right, oh joy. But it's not like judge Bridges ever tried to hide that point. He made his judgement based on his best interpretation of the LAW. That doesn't mean he thought it was a good law, or a law he necessarily liked, but that is what he is SUPPOSED to do.
I have in my time railed mightily against judges legistlating from the bench, I refuse to change now because one DIDN'T when I personally wanted him to. He took the existing law that he had to work with and made his decision based on it. I know that it doesn't help that the law is assinine and unreachable due to many factors, but if he took off and made a different ruling, then
a) the state supreme court (who have already repeatedly demonstrated their leftist leanings) would have overturned it in a heartbeat, and
b) he would be guilty of EXACTLY the same thing that many R's complain about in obviously left leaning judges.
With that said, we need to take Olympia's obvious trends with current legislation and ram it down their throats next election time (and I include the damn R's that went along with the insane tax hikes and labeled them 'emergency clauses') I know an aweful lot of D's that are all excited about Rossi losing the case, that aren't going to be so excited as they look at their ever mounting tax debt due to our lovely legislature. That and the ever decreasing small-mid business tax base is what I think will be a much better lever for change than mere political partisianship. Their thoughts might be swayed by rhetoric, but their lives are ruled through their wallets. No new gas tax seems a good place to start!
P.S. Sorry about any misspellings or typos, I just fix the darn computers, I don't type on them :)
Posted by: Disgruntled IT guy on June 6, 2005 12:37 PMRight off the bat though, I see a few good things coming of this.
1) Fence-sitters who were neutral before are now very enticed to hate Former Attorney General Gregoire's guts. Two lateral clicks says she'll never be electable for anything except DNC chair-thing.
2) Every republican and previously anti-gregoire type is positively livid. That means a couple of things:
a) Lots of heads are going to roll all over the state, both at local levels, in the state legislature and hopefully there'll even be negative response for the Witches from Washington, our lovely US Senators.
b) Lots of public support for election reform. Lots.
3) All our Re-Elect Rossi stuff is still perfectly valid (provided he runs again in 08). Save a tree, shoot a greenie, right? ;) (j/k)
4) ˇViva Cascadia! ;)
Why not a double-blind system, so we can track down and remove illegally-cast ballots?
Posted by: Larry on June 6, 2005 12:43 PMNo blather. No over-the-top rhetoric. No reactionary response against Judge Bridges. A sound posting that could have been written by someone one either end of the political spectrum. A real class act.
But it leaves me wondering if anyone has checked to see if Stefan Sharkansky is laying in a bathtub with his wrists slit?
He was all over this story, until...
Why just last night he promised his "...final post before the ruling..." and then followed up less than 12 hours later with his 'if you agree with me you're right, and if you don't you're a communist...'
I sure hope his alright. I really do. I like having someone to laugh at.
Posted by: Steve on June 6, 2005 12:46 PMWouldn't it be wonderful if some of the common, god fearing, tax paying residents of the great state went up to the state capital, walked into the chambers, sat down and refused to move?
How would that be explained?
Enough is Enough....I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it any more!!! Stop the madness by stopping the theft of your rights!!!
As a side comment to all of you dumbshit libss...How does your party complain about the theft of the presidential election when the only cases that have been presented have only involved demo party hacks (see Wisconsin, St Louis, and you great state of WA)? Don't say what about Ohio, because any issues in Ohio were under the jurisdiction of the local party (ie. lack of voting machines or allocation of machines to precents was not decided by Karl Rove...he ain
't that good, no matter what you think)...
Love, Big Biff
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 12:51 PMI could call Bridges a coward and the evidence is there that he cannot make an obvious ruling but I am forced to say he was an honest man so as to follow the 'law' as well. I would not want his ego bruised or anything like that.
So what will be the next excuse for the Do Nothing US Attorney General?
Look over there Sam Reed doing the "Phyrrhic Victory Dance".
The Seattle Times and PI can now plot the personal attack piece on The Shark.
Columnists and editorial boards can finally put to rest the demons of ethics and morality and enjoy victory of evil.
Auditors that declared Dean 'one of the best' in Ocean Shores can now dream of increasing the fraud in their department.
Dean Logan can finally resign 'for health reasons', of course. His new book for children is tenatively titled "Everyone Loves to Count and Draw" and has the story line of a Queen that needs the taxes her way and a boy that figures out using numbers and marking pens just how to do it!...so Magical!
A rogue can now start plotting how to steal the votes of all the public officials across the state since it is now exposed how easy it is by redirecting all those absentee ballots-feeding through a provisional in their name etc. since they won't fix the system.
Move On can't wait for '06 when they will just be allowed right in the ballot printing room and avoid destroying the environment by actually driving around to get all those votes.
All..what is the future of the players in this? Lets have some fun!! Imagine what Paul B. is doing right now? Has Nick Handy broken his arm yet patting himself on the back? Is that hit piece on the Shark already ready to go?
To chat live:
http://www.webcityusa.com/chat.html
Sex offenders? Sorry, again kiddo, not where I live -I've checked the zip code and unless they are hired as live-in nannies or gardners they can't afford to live here.
Roads/potholes? Well, I'm a pretty damned good driver and MY cars (you know, the ones with superior German engineering) handle pretty darn well, so I'm not too worried. And PS on the cars - bought my last NEW car in this tax usory state in 1992. Yes, I've bought other cars, but NEVER a new car in this state. I decided that when Comrade Locke took office -you know the guy whose frequent trade missions to China coincided with his family visits there.
By the way, you have yet to thank me and the others like me who pay taxes so YOUR kids can enjoy the area schools. I've been here 13 years paying school taxes and educated 3 kids OUTSIDE THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM.
You're welcome.
And no, my individual little disposable income spending boycott may not amount to much... but go ahead and multiply it by the number of Rossi voters + the number of disgusted Gregoire voters.
Don't you worry kiddo, I won't do without the things I enjoy, I'll do WITH them from ANY STATE BUT WASHINGTON.
Posted by: Cheryl on June 6, 2005 01:07 PMBridges' decision is meaningless. In fact, upon closer scrutiny - it would appear that Bridges left the door open for the Supremes to reverse his decision. This way - he can be held blameless, and the ultimate decision rests with the Supreme Court.
I hold no particular hope that the SC will rule any differently as they certainly appear to be products of the culture and climate of the People's Republik of Washington... but nonetheless, it's not over yet.
This contest is an obviously polarized and highly politically charged issue that no judge in his/her right mind would want to set any precedent with.
While some might consider his decision cowardly, looking at it from a broader perspective - it may well have been simple self-preservation, whilst foisting the ultimate responsibility for setting precedent to the Supremes, with carefully crafted observations about the process that leaves the door open, while appearing to have followed the letter of the law, despite ignoring the intent.
Posted by: DanC on June 6, 2005 01:13 PMJRR, your facts are wrong. Bush's reelection in 2004 was the first time since 1988 that a candidate (then, W's papa) to gain more than 50% of the popular vote. In '84, Reagan had 58.8% of the popular vote, but only 50.8% in '80; Carter had 50.1% in '76 -- identical to Bush's 50.1% in 2004; Nixon had a whopping 60.3% in 1972, while Johnson had 60.6% in '64. This ties FDR's 60.6% in 1936 -- the highest since the popular vote has been recorded.
Lincoln came into office in 1860 with only 39.9% of the popular vote, and was re-elected in 1864 with 55.1%.
I don't see the point you're trying to make with mandate -- nor do I see the Democrats' position -- that you somehow need more than 50% of the popular vote to have something called a mandate.
Need I remind you, however, that Bush lost the 2000 election in terms of the popular vote (thus Gore had the popular "mandate"), and had a 2.5% majority in 2004. Assuming our voting tabulation to be accurate to within +/-2% error and free of (--gasp!--) fraud, that would be a clear and decisive victory.
Who here can point out to us what the margin of error, nationwide, in the vote tabulation in the 2004 election? (This assumes that the Diebold machines in Ohio and elsewhere were on the up and up, not hacked, etc., since there was no verifiable paper trail.)
First of all, who allowed the lax, corruption prone election process that we currently have?
Weren't the Republicans in the majority when these rules were passed?
It's time for republicans to wake up to the truth in this state. Some of our own leaders have sold us down the river (can you say Sam Reed?).
Posted by: jaybo on June 6, 2005 01:17 PMI just want to know where I can buy a bumper sticker that says "She's not my Governor!" I saw one a few weeks ago....... Now, I want one!
Posted by: sgmmac on June 6, 2005 01:36 PMYou forget that most people, average people, don't give a rats ass about this stuff. First rule of politics is that people forget and are dumb. It's pretty simple. You can hope that you'll have rossi supporters not paying taxes, but you won't. You'll be the person on the extreme (along with your cronies on this extremist blog) who looks like they've gone crazy. It's easy to claim that people will follow you, but they wont. You'll be the one driving down to Oregon to buy stuff because of an election that you can't get over. Who's goose is cooked now?
Posted by: Big Biff on June 6, 2005 01:50 PMYou don't like our state? Get the F out.
Posted by: The_Gent on June 6, 2005 02:05 PMHalieluja!
Posted by: Donnageddon on June 6, 2005 02:14 PMAnd to think....we haven't even taken our gloves off yet!
It isn't over........The Rossi contest was just the announcement of the war against the liberal/socialist/communist take over of our State.....The battle has yet to begin...
Let the trolls gloat! They will be back to squealing and crying like little girls soon enough...
Posted by: Deborah on June 6, 2005 02:36 PMI have no idea what will happen in 2008, but anybody who thinks HypocRossi can ride his "stolen electiob" to victory is similarily delusional.
HypocRossi lost fair and square, get over it.
Posted by: Adam T on June 6, 2005 03:16 PMI have no idea what will happen in 2008, but anybody who thinks HypocRossi can ride his "stolen election" to victory is similarily delusional.
HypocRossi lost fair and square, get over it.
Posted by: Adam T on June 6, 2005 03:16 PMIs Rossi going to admit that this was all a sham and not appeal? Or is he riding this crooked horse all the way to hell on an appeal?
Posted by: JDB on June 6, 2005 03:23 PMHe has to argue that the judge is mistaken and call for an appeal. The real issue is whether the State Supreme Court will agree to hear his appeal.
Posted by: Adam T on June 6, 2005 03:50 PMIt would be better if Rossi got a job in the private sector (or kept his current job if that's what he's been doing) while keeping up a profile in the state with GOP supporters during the next 3.5 years. Then, in the next election for Governor, Rossi can race against Gregoire and it will bring back all of the issues that have been covered in this election contest. The MSM will no doubt label is that re-match royal. That'll stir people from their sleep-induced hypnosis and they'll remember how bad this election was and that deceit and dishonesty ushered Gregoire into office. It will help us to remember when so many will have "forgotten".
In the meantime, I think we might see a revolution in the House and Senate, which might pave the way for a revolution in the Governor's chair.
By the way, to Sputnik:
Thanks for all the numbers. My reference to Lincoln was hyperbole, used to make the point that Bush has more of a mandate now nationally than Gregoire has locally. But while the MSM supports the rights of the Democrats to block and obstruct Bush (because in the view of the MSM, Bush has no mandate), our local MSM supports Gregoire and the Democrats, without ever mentioning that her overreaching legislation has no mandate behind it whatsoever. That I think will be evident over the course of the next few election cycles, culminating with her dismissal from office in the next 2008 election.
Posted by: JRR on June 6, 2005 04:29 PM"...counted as fairly as possible..." (This guy banks with Sims.)
"Spitting...on...the rights of fellow citizens..?" Hmmm---CAO; Tent Cities; admission of certifying a false voter reconciliation; Mexican government designed lesson plans for WA students; in-state college tuition rates for illegal aliens; steady stream of "found ballots;" Ahh--never mind...
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on June 6, 2005 10:35 PMProfessional Troll Hunter
Hours: 24/7/365.25
Pay: The satisfaction of a job well done. And the fun of doing the work, too...
Education: Must be able to read and write fluent english. English, not the mongrel tongue most people speak these days.
Other requirements: Unlike their quarry, the troll hunter must be intelligent. That means an IQ GREATER than one's hat size (or shoe size in certain jurisdictions).
All training will be OTJ, just like the good 'ole days.
;) :-P :-D Teeheeheeeheeheehee