Sound Politics: How many voted NO on both?

March 14, 2007

How many voted NO on both?

The various politicians and columnists have convinced themselves that "none of the above" won yesterday's Viaduct vote, so it's important to remind them that they have no basis for drawing that conclusion.

I called in to KUOW Weekday this morning to force the one question that matters: How many voted NO on both? Hilariously, Clowncilman Peter Steinbrueck insists that his "NO on both" campaign won, even though he has no idea how many people voted his way. I joined the conversation at 24:39. This exchange starts at 27:36:

Stefan: Mr. Steinbrueck, you're declaring victory. How many people voted NO on both? What is that number? What percentage actually voted NO on both?

Steinbrueck: You know, I'm not interested in academic exercises. You can do your own analysis and write it on your blog and let your supporters agree with you.

Stefan: How many voters voted NO on both? You're declaring victory and you won't say how many voters voted the way you claim

Steinbrueck: 70% said NO on the tunnel and 56% said NO on the rebuild. It's as simple as that.

Stefan: How many voted NO on both?

Scheer: Why are you sticking ... so what do you want to do, Stefan Sharkansky, what are you saying it means?

Stefan: Well I think it's inconclusive. And I don't think you can declare victory and tear down the Viaduct and have surface gridlock on the basis of this inconclusive vote. I think more likely than not, more people, the plurality of the voters chose the elevated. It wasn't a majority, but it was the larger of the three choices.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 14, 2007 12:46 PM | Email This

Comments

1. Steinbreuck is living on a different planet. It's known as Seattle. He recently stated that due to "peak oil" the automobile will be obsolete within twenty years. That's his credibility factor.

I have four math nerds working the logic diagrams needed for calculation of the set limits on the ten voting options. I will post the results.

Elections don't indicate the desires of the voter. They reveal the compromises associated with the least odious choice. In the current case, and in my opinion, it is retrofit, not the surface option.

So how about another lousy election with only two choices? Retrofit or Surface?

Posted by: Bart Cannon on March 14, 2007 12:59 PM

2. This election was a big defeat for Mrs. Gregoire and her lack of backbone and lack of effective leadership.

We will continue to have deadlock on this issue, with nothing getting decided or done for the next year and a half. Governor Dino Rossi will exercise real leadership, and come up with a solid proposal, which he will be able to get through the legislature within a couple of months after being sworn into office in January 2009.

Posted by: Richard Pope on March 14, 2007 01:01 PM

3. This election just shows that I'm glad I don't live in Seattle.

Posted by: Jack Burton on March 14, 2007 01:05 PM

4. Jack, if you live in this State, the vote affected you.

Posted by: swatter on March 14, 2007 01:16 PM

5. This elections shows:

1. Like Jack, I'm glad I don't live in Seattle.

2. I'm really gonna wish I made Seattle-level wages when the tax bill for the Metro-Via-Tunnel comes due for us poor sods in the rest of Washington.

Posted by: Rey Smith on March 14, 2007 01:18 PM

6. again. . .

70,744 votes counted sofar for building something

118,383 votes counted sofar for not building something

Posted by: Peoples Asphalt Coalition on March 14, 2007 01:20 PM

7. It looks like the cry from Gregoire on replacing the Viaduct because of the danger of falling when asking for more GAS TAX now she has flip-flopped on the voters who passed the GAS TAX. When asked about a retrofit for $800.000 the answer was no. Now the plan sounds like lets do a little retrofit. When does the registered car owners get their rebate checks for this flip-flop..

Posted by: George on March 14, 2007 01:37 PM

8. So how many people actually voted not to build anything by voting NO to the Tunnel and NO to Viaduct?

Posted by: me on March 14, 2007 01:55 PM

9. The people in Seattle largely elect ass-klowns that view social engineering, redistribution, "the environment", etc. as more important that a functioning economy and infrastructure that supports its citizens.

And so it's only fitting that they will get more gridlock and conditions that will drive business out of Seattle and Puget Sound. Let them display the consequences of their actions.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 14, 2007 01:58 PM

10. Me @ 8

It looks like approximately 24,895 people filled out their ballots with a "No and No" vote. This is out of the 98,639 ballots which have been counted so far.

The number is a little squishy because some people voted "Yes and Yes", voted for the elevated structure rebuild and left the tunnel portion of the ballot blank and vica versa.

When King County elections finishes its counting hopefully there will be an exact breakdown of what the ballots looked like.

But other than being an academic exercise in people's inability to do simple math none of this means anything.

Posted by: Reporterward on March 14, 2007 02:12 PM

11. @4 Sad but true.

However, I'm still glad I don't live there.

Posted by: Jack Burton on March 14, 2007 02:23 PM

12. damn! I wanted to call the two tunnel entrances the Sim's orifice and the Nickles' orifice (unfortunately not original)!!

I voted NO and Yes(rebuild)

Posted by: ajday on March 14, 2007 02:34 PM

13. mark my words the "powers that be" have just begun to choke the viaduct chicken.

Posted by: JDH on March 14, 2007 02:56 PM

14. Stephan:
The simplest way to explain this is that 45% voted yes for the retrofit and 55% voted no. What we don't know is what the 55% would prefer instead of the retrofit. Perhaps most of them prefer to leave the viaduct as is and take the risk that it won't survive and earthquake. Even if they voted No to both options that doesn't mean we can assume they prefer to knock the viaduct down and replace it with a surface option.

Posted by: Dbolotin on March 14, 2007 04:07 PM

15. Don't you really think it's about time we ask Darcy Burner to weigh in on the Viaduct Issue. After all most of her time was spend fundraising and campaigning in Seattle, she should have a real "feel" for what needs to be done. She probably won't comment though, she might offend her little boy toy Goldy.

Posted by: Huh? on March 14, 2007 05:23 PM

16. "Every bus you see takes 60 cars off the roads" - Peter Steinbrueck, on KUOW this morning.

For flat unsupported assertions, this is breathtaking - raw propaganda, for effect only.

Others have observed that 74% of the voters supported maintaining the highway capacity in one way or another. That 74% isn't supporting Mr. Steinbrueck's approach to forcing us out of our automobiles.

As a minister, Mr. Steinbrueck has a humbly small congregation - 26 % of those voting - to preach to about transportation issues, despite the enormous megaphone he is given by KUOW and the local MSM. Should a representative of that more practical 74% win his vacant City Council seat, Stattle might face less Alice-in-Wonderland politics in future.

Posted by: Hank Bradley on March 14, 2007 08:29 PM