November 08, 2006
Reichert maintains lead

As of this writing, Dave Reichert is holding his lead over Darcy Burner, by nearly 2,700 votes, or 2.2%.

In King County, with early absentees and nearly all of the polling ballots counted as of 2:30 am today, Burner has a 0.68% lead. In Pierce County, Reichert leads by almost 13%. In 2000, the 8th district votes were split roughly 80%/20% between King and Pierce respectively. Assuming the same split applies this year, and Reichert maintains his 13% lead in Pierce County, Burner would need an overall 3% lead in King County to win, and a 4% - 5% lead in the remaining ballots. That's certainly possible, but given that both the early votes and late votes gave Burner a much smaller lead, I think Reichert should be more optimistic than Burner at this point.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 08, 2006 10:50 AM | Email This
1. King County Elections is most certainly cranking up their 'Xerox 4590 ballot copier' to overcome Reichert's lead. That is if they still want to be employed by Mr. Sims.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen on November 8, 2006 11:02 AM
2. Someone should convince Pierce County NOT to release their numbers until after King County is finished. We all know how that goes.

Posted by: kathy on November 8, 2006 11:09 AM
3. Sam Reed's office had better be checking to make sure the provisionals were not automatically added to the machines. For it to be this close, it sounds to me like it's entirely possible that people were bussed from the safe liberal districts to vote in the 8th. I warned about that happening last week and again yesterday.

Posted by: ferrous on November 8, 2006 11:13 AM
4. Let's see if they try to pull boxes of ballots out of the closet NINE TIMES again.

Posted by: ecurbh on November 8, 2006 11:14 AM
5. Isn't it a shame that we are all expecting King County to manufacture votes for the Democratic candidate again? Hopefully the Feds are prepared to step in and at least look over Sims and Co.'s shoulders.

Posted by: RadioMattM on November 8, 2006 11:31 AM
6. Opps. Don't look now but Darcy is now ahead by less than 700 votes:

Posted by: briansul on November 8, 2006 11:38 AM
7. No! Really?

Color me shocked.

Posted by: Frank Black on November 8, 2006 11:49 AM
8. Oh,'s those "overlooked" ballots from the back room.

Posted by: Susu on November 8, 2006 12:03 PM
9. It's only her ahead in KC and going by Stefan's analysis, she's not ahead by enough. *crossing fingers that Reichert maintains a solid lead*

Posted by: ferrous on November 8, 2006 12:04 PM
10. Heads up people. Briansul is only quoting the King County results. The 8th district spans Pierce and King. In Pierce, there's a much wider margin. It doesn't look good for Burner. Go to the WA Second State page for the full picture.

Posted by: FYI on November 8, 2006 12:05 PM
11. RadioMattM@5, yes it is shameful, but the shame is not properly directed at King County or the US government, but rather at Stefan and his band of sore loser conspiracy theorists.

Posted by: Bruce on November 8, 2006 12:07 PM
12. Why the hell can the rest of the state collect tabulate and go to bed and 15 hours after the polls close the dimwits in Korrupt King Kounty can't manage to finish counting their last 1.3699%?

PS: I don't know where Garfield County is but kudos to them for +77% turnout compared to the pathetic 30% in Korrupt King Kounty

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskold on November 8, 2006 12:10 PM
13. Briansul-- Burner is ahead by 700 votes in King County however she is behind in Pierce County by almost 3,000. You should know better than to expect King County to come up with a full vote total before they know how much the Democrat really needs!!! I realize the trouble in Iraq and some republican scandels however this state is making Iraq and Iran look conservative!! What has Darcy Burner ever done to be even considered for the house?

Brad Strecker

Posted by: Brad Strecker on November 8, 2006 12:10 PM
14. Now that the dems hace won, won't it be great when the troups are home, everybody has healthcare, windmills will be in our backyard for clean power, only the rich will pay taxes, stem cells will cure 100% of all health problems, abortion will be an accepted form of birth control. Remember Nancy said pays as we go!!


Posted by: Brad Strecker on November 8, 2006 12:16 PM
15. You guys are hilarious. As if its the Democrats that are the ones stealing elections, suppressing the vote and using every dirty, underhanded and undemocratic trick in the book to win at all costs. You all should be ashamed of yourselves.

Posted by: Mike Brodsky on November 8, 2006 12:35 PM
16. Ive been asking for hours, "why did they get Maria Cantwell's win ten minutes after the polls closed, but here we are waiting and hearing nothing on Reichert?"

King 5 didnt even show Reichert last night, they showed Darcy's speech that said 'it could take a month before we know' ...

And not to start rumors, but where is Mike? Where is Darcy's family? She was up there alone giving her speech.

Posted by: Lauri on November 8, 2006 12:37 PM
17. Mike, you must be new to our state...

Posted by: Lauri on November 8, 2006 12:39 PM
18. Mike, you must be new to our state...

Posted by: Lauri on November 8, 2006 12:40 PM
19. Mike, you must be new to our state...

Posted by: Lauri on November 8, 2006 12:40 PM
20. Mike, good one! you must be new to our state...

Posted by: Lauri on November 8, 2006 12:40 PM
21. Lauri, I share you passion and fears about Democrat malfesance. But really, there is a difference between a 60-40 blowout and a 51-49 nail biter, don't you think? And the idea that 49% of my neighbors voted for Burner makes me want to leave this region, if not the state. But where to go, that's the rub? You can't hide from idealists, they'll find you.

Posted by: huckleberry on November 8, 2006 12:42 PM
22. Having to get up off your fat ass and vote at a polling station is only surpressing the votes of people who only care enough to lick a stamp!!! I have a hard time understanding how that helps the republic. For republicans not to trust King County should be obvious, even to Democrats.

Posted by: Brad Strecker on November 8, 2006 12:43 PM
23. Current
Darcy Burner Democrat 59,268 48.9054%
Dave Reichert Republican 61,921 51.0946%
Total Votes: 121,189

But 2004
Dave Ross(D) 157,148 46.7009%
Dave Reichert(R) 173,298 51.5003%
Spencer Garrett(L) 6,053 1.7988%
Total Vote 336,499

There's got to be lots of votes to be counted.

Posted by: Robert on November 8, 2006 12:45 PM
24. Was there anyone who watched the televised debate who chose Reickert? Why?

Posted by: shirley on November 8, 2006 01:00 PM
25. Robert, not necessarily. Voters have a bad habit of coming out in higher numbers during presidential elections than mid-terms. You probably knew that and had just forgotten it, right?

Posted by: huckleberry on November 8, 2006 01:00 PM
26. Huck: "the idea that 49% of my neighbors voted for Burner makes me want to leave this region, if not the state"

I basically thought the same thing about all my neighbors that voted for Bush in 2004, and I'll give you the same advice that was given to me after that election, by a compassionate conservative:

Don't let the door hit your a$$ on the way out of town.

Posted by: Splinter on November 8, 2006 01:01 PM
27. Sorry Robert but there are NOT "lots of votes to be counted".

The ONLY county not finished counting is Korrupt King Kounty and as of 2:43am they only have 1.2699% left to count. According to the Sec State Page they will not update again till 6pm.

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskold on November 8, 2006 01:04 PM
28. I beg your pardon... I was reading PRECINTS not ballots.

Korrupt King has 274,052 to count
Pierce has 80,000 to count

Statewide there are still about 1/3 of the ballots to be counted.

Good grief

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskold on November 8, 2006 01:09 PM
29. Darcy by 129 -- regardless....

Posted by: Lew on November 8, 2006 01:25 PM
30. Lew, don't forget, the courts mandated that it should be 133.

Posted by: SouthernRoots on November 8, 2006 01:35 PM
31. So, how many of that 49% who voted for Darcy actually took the time to do some background research on her? If they had, they would have discovered that behind her cuteness, she has no record of public service. She also had a tendency to inflate her resume. And yet thousands voted for her without knowing much more than she was running with a D behind her name.

Posted by: Gary on November 8, 2006 01:43 PM
32. Splinter, I understand what you are saying about compassionate conservatives... the term is a euphemism for neo-conservative, and they can be fairly surly people. And by taking the insult you received from them and directing it at me, you reveal yourself to be somewhat surly, too? Did I read you correctly?

Posted by: huckleberry on November 8, 2006 01:44 PM
33. Gary, asks how many of that 49% who voted for Darcy actually took the time to do some background research on her?" Gary, while I was beating my wife this morning, I lamented about how screwed up the House would be with Charlie Rangel, John Conyers, and Alcee Hastings calling the shots in their respective committees (Ways and Means, Judiciary, Intelligence). My Democrat wife answered "Who are they?" Where is my golf club?!

Posted by: huckleberry on November 8, 2006 01:53 PM
34. Huck - My honest hope is that we can ALL begin to listen to one another and move away from this polarization. When you say that your neighbors voting (D) makes you want to leave the State, it makes me think you have no desire whatsoever to listen to was "said" by the electorate last night.

Honestly, I liked Reichert and think he is better for our state and probably has a better understanding of many issues facing our state. However, because this election in my mind was about the balance of power, I voted for anyone with a (D) behind thier name... regardless of their qualifications.

I am not a fan of the Democratic Party, and I sincerely hope that the power does not go directly to their collective heads as it did with the Republicans.... At this time, neither party represents me and I consider myself an independant.

If the Republican's get back to basic conservative principals, and stop pandering to what I consider a very dangerous and extremely theocratic base, they could eventually win me back. I not getting my hopes up, and it may turn out that in another election cycle or two, I'm voting for whomever has an (R) behind their name.

Posted by: Splinter on November 8, 2006 02:01 PM
35. Splinter, you can't be an "independent" if you vote for only Democrats just like you can't claim to be "independent" if you voted for all Republicans. It doesn't work that way. And honestly, if your attitude was to have change for the sake of change, what do you think that's gonna mean? Sure, Seattle will change greatly if, oh, say some terrorists floated in a bomb on a tanker into Elliot Bay. Maybe it's extreme to say such things, but giving power to the Democrats is giving power to people who are more interested in forcing us to let suspected terrorists go and less interested in actually killing the terrorists and destroying their cells we find when we come across them.

Posted by: ferrous on November 8, 2006 02:07 PM
36. Uhhhh... Hey Splint, Huck didn't say his neighbors voting (D) made him want to leave the state. He said 49% of his neighbors voting Burner made him feel that way. I trust you can see the distinction, if not actually agree with it.

Posted by: ajopalm on November 8, 2006 02:10 PM
37. ferrous: "Sure, Seattle will change greatly if, oh, say some terrorists floated in a bomb on a tanker into Elliot Bay"

Which is why I voted for change. Obviously, after six years of complete control, the GOP has hardly even begun to address the security issues outlined by the 9/11 commission. Someone floating a bomb into Elliott Bay is exactly why I voted (D) instead of (R) this election.

I am not voting for change for "the sake of change", I am voting for change because the party in power for the last six years cannot get the job done, and seems intent on sacrificing basic democratic principals (conservative principals) for a temporary and false sense of security.

I have yet to hear of any American politician recommending that we "let terrorists go". I have heard the arguement made that we should follow our rule of law when prosecuting these criminals, and your failure to see the difference seems to be one of the reasons the GOP lost the moderate vote last night.

Posted by: Splinter on November 8, 2006 02:43 PM
38. Cantwell won by a landslide because she's well qualified, and has done a great job, getting most of the independent vote.
Burner had a harder time because many independents, or Democrats crossed over voted for the better qualified candidate (IMO Reichert), once it became apparent that control of the House was no longer an issue. There is no great mystery here..

Posted by: Proteus on November 8, 2006 04:10 PM
39. I see conservative paranoia is alive and well, and goes well with defeat.

Go ahead and feel sorry for yourselves. Nobody else does. Maybe you'll get Congressman Hairdo as your consolation prize. You can dress him up and take him places, and morons will think he's important!

Posted by: Ain't Democracy Grand? on November 8, 2006 04:41 PM
40. have your bottle ready...when KCE goes into overtime in finding back room ballots, your going to need the sedation.

What bank is it that Sims goes to again?

Posted by: Andy on November 8, 2006 04:56 PM
41. win or lose - Bruner did a brillant campaign in her attempt to upset a solid incumbent

dave could not have done a more horrrid job

Posted by: Jack on November 8, 2006 05:03 PM
42. Frankly, from what I saw yesterday, Burner deserves to win and Reichert does not, and it makes me sick to my stomach!

I worked one of the polls that got moved because of flooding (unfortunately a nonpartisan job). I can't tell you how many D's came in saying "Darcy's people called and told me where the new polling place was." Not a single R told me the same thing. Some people just thought the polling center was closed, and didn't even bother to come out.

Had 2 D scrutineers at our place, checking the inspectors lists of voted voters, making notes, and calling the Darcy HQ with frequent updates. It was awful trying to be non-partisan and polite, while they outworked all our people.

Our disctric is usually pretty R (Kathy Lambert country), but yesterday, we were pretty solid D from what I saw. I thought we had a "machine". It seems to have worked just as "efficiently" in the rest of the country too.

Posted by: Lisa on November 8, 2006 06:35 PM
43. We received a phone call about the move to a new location. I didn't think it was a partisan issue. We got ours from the KC Election office.

Posted by: steve miller on November 8, 2006 06:53 PM
44. Sorry, Lisa... if Dave was run over by a bus, a lightweight empty suit like Burner NEVER would "deserve" to be in Congress.

Posted by: Hinton on November 8, 2006 10:12 PM
45. Where in the world are UncleWitz and John McD? I would have expected to see them commenting by now, if for no other reason than to gloat and make nasty remarks. Must have drowned in their champagne.

Posted by: katomar on November 8, 2006 10:36 PM
46. I do know where Garfield County is It is between Columbia and Asotin Countins in Eastern Washington. The county seat is Pomeroy.

Posted by: Mike Barer on November 9, 2006 09:41 AM
Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember info?