From Chris McGann's look at Evergreen Progress, the polyglot Democratic attack PAC going after Dino Rossi:
"The contributions that Evergreen Progress has received thus far are contributions that were earned through someone's sweat and effort," he said. "The construction workers, the nurses, the teachers, the home health care workers, the people who have contributed to this work really hard for their money and those are the contributions that we have received.
Um, then what to make of the cool $1 million Evergreen Progress collected from the Democratic Governor's Association according to current PDC data? "Sweat and effort"? Right.
Plus, you just know that every dime from the unions supplying the other $1+ million in Evergreen Progress's coffers was freely given and gladly donated by individual members to the political cause in question.
Or maybe not.
UPDATE: On a related note:
The Republican Governors Association hinted Wednesday that it would spend more of its $20 million war chest in Washington to help Dino Rossi.
"Hinted." Maybe they're just "hinting" now, but big bucks from all sides on this race is a given.
Lastly, note that in the article, Democratic spokesman Kelly Steele is reduced to mere rhetoric to argue against the established, historic Democratic tilt of our state's primaries - because he doesn't have any data to actually back up his argument.
I do, however, give him points for valor.
Posted by Eric Earling at August 20, 2008 10:53 PM | Email ThisYou have to go back to the blanket primary (let's say 1992, 1996 and 2000 for the three most recent), which is highly similar to the top two primary, in that voters can pick the candidate of their choice in each race, regardless of party.
This explains why Republican votes in this year's primary range from 33.36% for challenger Dick McEntee for Auditor to 58.39% for incumbent Secretary of State Sam Reed, and Democratic votes range from 33.50% for Jason Osgood for SoS to 59.91% for Brian Sonntag as Auditor.
In fact, the top two primary is getting bigger partisan swings than we had under the old blanket primary. 1996 was the last blanket primary where we had incumbents of both parties seeking re-election. The Republican vote varied from 37.18% for Richard Pope challenging for Attorney General to 60.40% for SoS Ralph Munro. The Democratic vote varied from 36.45% for Phyllis Kenney challenging for SoS to 57.32% for AG Christine Gregoire.
So historically, in the blanket primary, you have swings of at least 20% to 25% within a party's ticket, from the party's strongest incumbent to the party's weakest challenger. The same is holding true of the top two primary.
People preferred Gregoire by four points or more over Rossi -- not because the turnout was disproportionately Democratic (a theory belied by the healthy majorities for Reed and McKenna), but simply because more people prefer Gregoire over Rossi.
Posted by: Richard Pope on August 21, 2008 12:10 AMNovember 2000 General
Governor
Candidate Party Votes Percentage
Gary Locke D 1441973 58.38%
John Carlson R 980060 39.68%
Steve W. LePage L 47819 1.94%
September 2000 Primary
Governor
Candidate Party Votes Percentage
Gary Locke D 701929 54.32%
John Carlson R 446142 34.52%
Harold Hochstatter R 93467 7.23%
Meta Heller D 28578 2.21%
Steve W. LePage L 22186 1.72%
2000 D Primary - 56.55%
2000 R Primary - 41.75%
2000 D General Gain - 1.83%
2000 R General Drop - 2.07%
2000 D General Swing - 3.90%
November 1996 General
Governor
Candidate Party Votes Percentage
Gary Locke D 1296492 57.96%
Ellen Craswell R 940538 42.04%
September 1996 Primary
Governor
Candidate Party Votes Percentage
Gary Locke D 287762 23.65%
Norman Rice D 212888 17.50%
Ellen Craswell R 185680 15.26%
Dale Foreman R 162615 13.37%
Jay Inslee D 118571 9.75%
Norm Maleng R 109088 8.97%
Jim Waldo R 63854 5.25%
Pam Roach R 29533 2.43%
Nona Brazier R 21237 1.75%
Brian Zetlen D 6152 0.51%
Warren E. Hanson R 4886 0.40%
Bob Tharp R 4825 0.40%
Jeff Powers SWP 3742 0.31%
Mohammad H. Said D 3007 0.25%
Max Englerius D 2837 0.23%
1996 D Primary - 51.89%
1996 R Primary - 47.83%
1996 D General Gain - 6.09%
1996 R General Drop - 5.79%
1996 D General Swing - 11.88%
November 1992 General
Governor
Candidate Party Votes Percentage
Mike Lowry D 1184315 52.16%
Ken Eikenberry R 1086216 47.84%
September 1992 Primary
Governor
Candidate Party Votes Percentage
Mike Lowry D 337783 29.23%
Ken Eikenberry R 258553 22.37%
Sid Morrison R 250418 21.67%
Dan McDonald R 144050 12.47%
Joe King D 96480 8.35%
Sally McQuown D 31175 2.70%
Richard B. “Ornery Dick” Short D 8470 0.73%
Bob Tharp R 8103 0.70%
Wayne Madsen D 7860 0.68%
Mike The Mover IC 6645 0.58%
Kathleen Wheeler SW 6068 0.53%
1992 D Primary - 41.29%
1992 R Primary - 57.21%
1992 D General Gain - 10.87%
1992 R General Drop - 9.37%
1992 D General Swing - 20.24%
Average D General Gain (1992-2000) - 6.26%
Average R General Drop (1992-2000) - 5.74%
Average D General Swing (1992-2000) - 12.00%
*** The GOP analysis of Gregoire's situation struck many Democrats as off base.
"I think that's crazy," said state Democratic Party spokesman Kelly Steele. "The primary electorate substantially benefited Rossi. It's an older, more conservative electorate, his strongholds were mostly vote by mail, and in spite of these substantial advantages he still lost by a sizable margin, which continues to grow by the day."
Steele said the terrain only gets tougher for Rossi as the November election nears.
"How can he think he has a better chance with the enormous turnout and extreme enthusiasm at the top of the ticket for Sen. Barack Obama and Democrats?" he asked. ***
Obviously, Steele has the data to back up his arguments, since a greater proportion of Republican voters historically turn out for primaries, than for general elections. The only aberration has been in 2004 and 2006, with the pick-a-party ballot primary.
I do, however, give Eric Earling points for valor.
Posted by: Richard Pope on August 21, 2008 12:26 AMMcGann's BS is much like the continuing delusion oft-spewed by Queen Chrissy: that this state is running on a surplus, and that she isn't a wholly-owned (like a Pike Street hooker) tribal subsidiary.
Posted by: Hinton on August 21, 2008 12:47 AMTrue enough. Eric wants to cherry-pick even older data than what I have chosen. Apparently, during 1972 to 1988, the Republican percentage for Governor increased from the primary to the general election. And from 1992 to 2000, the Republican percentage for Governor decreased from the primary to the general election.
As for myself, I would say that the more recent past is a better predictor of the future, than the more distant past. If you use 1972 data, there were still over 40% of folks in Seattle voting Republican, and a number of Republican legislative seats within city limits. And some remoter areas now held by Republicans were pretty reliably Democratic back then.
Posted by: Richard Pope on August 21, 2008 06:06 AMPersonally I think that is a good thing. I prefer to vote for a person and not a party. Even within the same party the candidates can have very different views and qualifications. Some of the current races are showing just that.
Posted by: Vince on August 21, 2008 06:42 AMExtremely wealthy people fund the GOP because they are they ones that benefit from the "Conservative" (fraudulent, because there is nothing conservative in it) "trickle up" bs economic fraud they preach.
People who work for a living, the ones the Republicons want to tax, so they don't have to tax the "haves" are the ones being slaughtered by outsourcing, de-regulation, and inflation.
If you are a billionaire, vote Republicon. If you are not part of the top 1% vote Democrat.
It's simple. Don't believe me? Tune in to AM1090 and listen to Thom Hartmann explain how it works every morning at 9:00 am.
I am tired of politicians, only supporting the "haves" telling me to blame someone else for the damage they are doing to my country, my state, my family, and my children's future.
There is nothing the GOP stands for that is not fraudulent. Family values my ass. Moral anything, what a joke. Conservative? Not on your life.
You don't even need a brain to understand this.
You also don't seem to understand that some rich people give money to Democrats. These folks understand that supporting Republiconvicts could be considered an act of treason.
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on August 21, 2008 09:58 AMLOL you damn fool. Can you say Kennedy, Kerry, Edwards. Shall I go on.
You must be an 18yr.
Your post sure in the heck show someone with so little of an education.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on August 21, 2008 10:47 AMhttp://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/06/13/senators.finances/
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on August 21, 2008 10:53 AMThe wealthiest counties across the country are almost all Democrat. San Juan County, Washington; Blaine County (Sun Valley), Idaho; Teton County (Jackson Hole), Wyoming, all blue in the last presidential election! Wealthy elties favor big government that they can control, hence the Democrat Party by natures attracts elties and the power hungry. Bill Gates isn't a righty, nor is Warren Buffet. GE, Microsoft, Google, Costco, Starbucks, are all lefty leaning companies. Jim Sinegal of Costco is a huge lefty. Ditto Howard Schultz of Starbucks and that crook over at Real(annoying)Networks.
The true liberals are on the right these days. The left is loaded with statist wealthy elites, commies, and other leftist special interests such as religious environmental wackos and corrupt statist parasites like unions and bureaucrats.
Look at all the rich elite lefties who have bought themselves senate seats recently: Maria Cantwell, Jon Corzine, Mark Dayton. The Democrats are the party of the wealthy elite. The wealthy elite wants to keep us down via high taxes, regulation, and govt. pork so they can remain in control. The more people who attain the same or more wealth, the less power they have. The haves want to keep power by paying off some of the have nots and keeping the others down. The Democrats are the corrupt party buying off large portions of the poulation and holding the rest back.
Posted by: AP on August 21, 2008 11:13 AMYou are right. There are quite a few extremely rich people that recognize the fact that the GOP is pretty much a criminal organization, and support Democrats, while taking into account some Dems are also pigs feeding at the same corporate trough.
AP, you are saying the Republioconvicts are the party that represents poor people, and the middle class, and not corporate America, and the elite? I don't know what you are smoking, or where the cave you live in is located, but you really need some help. I mean real help.
Tune into Thom Hartmann, or Ed Schultz, and find out what is really going on in your country. Unless of course you live elsewhere.
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on August 21, 2008 11:36 AMIsn't it funny. Facts can't win, so he changes what we are talking about.
Go away fool. You bring nothing to this blog!
Well except for "lack of facts"
If so, are you saying government has virtually no usefulness?
Posted by: BA on August 21, 2008 12:19 PMThe guy is such a cartoon that it's hard to believe anyone out there is really that brainwashed by the bankrupt, childrens program fund-stealing mental midgets over at 1090AM.
Posted by: johnny on August 21, 2008 12:51 PMThom Hartmann has never admitted he is a liar, because he can have a political talk show without lying. I know it seems impossible. Same with Franken. They don't have to lie. They don't support a party based on lies.
Wait till you insurance is cancelled, your job outsourced, you house foreclosed on, or your child poisoned.
johnnie, I am real. I am alway right too, because ALL FACTS SUPPORT MY POSITIONS....
I don't have to live in a "slavery is freedom" "ignorance is strength" "war is peace" fantasy world.
G.G. I think the handouts you are referring to is the billions upon billions in tax breaks big oil is getting, not the pennies for single moms, or heating oil for the elderly poor right?
Republicons are a disease.
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on August 21, 2008 01:57 PMYou have got to be kidding me. What would you expect from a SOCIALIST??? Why on earth should anyone trust Hartmann when it comse to government and economics???
If you want to educate yourself on this matter, I suggest two books:
The Law by Frederic Bastiat
Socialism by Ludwig von Mises
I doubt that you can seriously contend for socialism as a viable system after reading those two books. It just doesn't work!
"For socialists, not just the wealth, but the guilt, must be redistributed" - Andrew Sandlin
Dude I am the constitutionalist.
Name one article of the constitution the Bush Crime Family has not violated.
(Crickets chirping)
As far as Evergreen Progress. Go after (gotta hide in the shadows) Rossi all you want. He is a fraud, whether half the state want to admit it or not.
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on August 21, 2008 04:12 PMAnd as you are such a perfect mold for the stereotype of obnoxious, loud-banging, only-drudge-up-what-I-need-to-support-my-positions-and-ignore-everything-else liberal blowhard, I do find myself curiously reading your first 2-3 posts on any one thread. Then, alas, I get tired of you and skip everything you type. You tend to seriously lack substance.
Fraud this, convict that, disease here, etc gets old. You really need a new tune. You should upgrade from 1090 to, say, Ross or Dory. It would be like graduating from Evergreen and enrolling in Berkeley.
Good luck. I hope you take this post as constructive critizism. I hate to see you wallow like this. I would like to see you as a blogger taken seriously in the future.
I guess by typing this, I am in a way, voting for change. However, I fear the learning curve may be too steep.
AFSMP, see you in the next thread....
Posted by: No Facts Support AFSMP on August 21, 2008 04:26 PMGreat reading list, esp. Bastiat. But for the casual reader I think LvM's Bureaucracy is a better place to start than Socialism. It presents the same argument but at 1/4 the number of pages. A less demading read all round too.
Have you read FB's Economic Sophisms? I can say with total certainty that several posters here have not...
"Facts" has (and no doubt more than a few on the right too) have moved beyond the point where they are satisfied being "for" their canditates and must now deny that we are human beings.
Posted by: Alex Hays on August 21, 2008 06:48 PMYour liberal pals in the Democratic party have controlled the public schools and governments of cities like Seattle, San Francisco, D.C., Detroit and Chicago for years. Yet what has been accomplished by them? What issues have been solved by them? Other than spending billions and increasing the size and scope of the bureaucracy, what has your side done?
Why should anyone vote Democrat and expect anything except higher taxes and more bloated and incompetent government?
Posted by: m on August 21, 2008 08:10 PMYou want to blame everyone under the sun for the problems created by Reagan, and the other union busting, free trading, de-regulating conservative moron/crooks.
Of course Corporate America, and the media companies they control will try to convince the feeble minded that helping the Wal Marts of this world crush small businesses (like mine) is "Good for America" and all that crap. I know Rossi agrees, helping big business screw small business is the way to make America great. (sink even more)
I ain't buying it. America is being robbed blind, and half the Dems, and all the Cons are in on it. As long as they get oil/drug/insurance/banking money for their next campaign, they will keep their mouths shut. Know what I mean? Personally I am sick of being ripped off. How about you?
I want to see the missing (un-redacted) emails, and every single document the Bush Crime Family is claiming executive privilege on, that has nothing to do with national security. It is my/our government, and the documents BELONG TO ME AND YOU! Not Bush, Rove, and Cheney. We pay their salaries. They work for us. If the documents show evidence of crimes, like we all know they do, then so be it. Prosecute them, or if they are innocent, let the documents prove it. If they are so innocent, they why are they hiding so many documents?????
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on August 21, 2008 09:39 PMThe documents are not there. Get over it.
If they were, you would still assume they are alterd, lying, corrupt, et al. Please, just stop.
There is a track record about withholding documents. As proven by the Clinton's, if you hold your documents long enough, everything will blow over.
I was impressed to see you mention "half the Dems". It's a start.
I'm going to take a stab in the dark here. You bleed union blood. Your anti-oil, walmart, insurance, banking, drug themes seem scripted.
Do not for one moment believe that a union is not as big a business as oil, walmart, insurance, banking or drugs. To do so shows you are still working on cleaning the sand out of your ears as it was probably stuck in it.
I am tired too of being ripped off. Taxes, nanny state, rampant illegal population growth, pandering to criminals and terrorists is not what I have been looking for the salaries to be spent on.
We as a society continue to make concessions to bleeding heart causes and we end up the worse for wear. Even you should be able to admit that through the haze of hatred you look through.
If we teach Darwinism in school as a "law", then we should not be upset when the fit survive and the others do not.
Harsh? Probably. But I am sick of my money going to ensure that those who do not want to work or insist on living off of the "whoa is me" handouts can continue in their lifestyle.
See, twit, I am as angry at the current state of this country as you. The difference between me and you is that you focus your hate and anger on individuals and corporations. I focus on the ideology that has failed and continues to fail us.
The same ideology that you are looking to perpetuate.
Please, quit using labels (bush crime family for example) and provide the links to facts you support your positions. And again, using AM1090 as a link will be taken as serious as me using KVI as a source on Horsesass.
Posted by: Chris on August 21, 2008 10:24 PMWhat would benefit our society more. Giving Warren Buffet a billion dollar tax cut, or tens of thousands of Americans a tax cut. Warren would put his extra money to work of course, but you think 50,000 poor or middle class people would not?
I don't want to "give" anything to anyone that is not doing their best to be productive. Neither do you.
I just don't think letting big business operate without restriction to lie, cheat, and steal from "us" is the right thing to do either. You know, that "regulation" thing.... Giving them tax breaks to outsource as much as possible? Not in my world.
Time to take care of America, and not China, and India for a change. So what if it costs Wal Mart, and Nike a nickel a share. And while we are at it, let the oil companies pay for the whole stinkin' Iraq war! It is because of them we are there.
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on August 21, 2008 10:47 PMHow on earth is a tax cut a giveaway?
If you take $20 out of my wallet instead of $50, how haven't given me $30, you just took a little lass. So get off of this idea that a tax cut is somehow a giveaway.