Reminder: you won't know the result of close races in Washington on Election night:
The upshot is that only about half of the votes in the election statewide are likely to be counted and the results posted by the end of the night Tuesday, state officials say. In King County, the number is less than that -- about 40 percent, county administrators say.
If that weren't tiresome enough, we get this from the Sam Reed:
Public confidence in elections -- crucial to the system -- wasn't made any easier to sustain when the Building Industry Association of Washington put up billboards across Eastern Washington reading, "Don't Let Seattle Steal This Election," Reed acknowledged.
Funny, I thought the lack of public confidence in elections had something to do with the gross and repeated displays of incompetence put on by King County in 2004, as the P-I article linked above discusses, and as the Seattle Times explored yesterday.
And Sam Reed wonders why grassroots Republicans can't stand him.
Bonus coverage: the Times also discusses the pending lag in King County ballot counting.
Posted by Eric Earling at November 01, 2008 08:29 AM | Email ThisGood strategy...blame the messenger.
Posted by: Paula on November 1, 2008 09:32 AM"Don't Let Sam Reed Allow Seattle to Steal the Election".
Posted by: Smoley on November 1, 2008 10:27 AMWill wonders never cease?
Posted by: Hinton's BlackBerry on November 1, 2008 10:50 AMAlas, I'm not done sucking money from the WWA economy before leaving and spending it anywhere else yet. About 8 more years, then buh-bye.
Posted by: Uncle Steve on November 1, 2008 12:18 PMThe correct number is 133 votes, as a judge from Eastern Washington certified. (The WSRP spent millions of dollars to obtain this result; you could at least use it.) Tell us of Western Washington again why we should try to converse with you people? (We call ourselves the reality-based community for a good reason.)
"The general mood in Eastern Washington is one of rebellion from Seattle."
Would that include not taking our tax money? We've got lots of great civic investment to make here, you know. (And most of us even appreciate it!)
Come to think of it, my implication that Eastern Washington is a malignant, value-sucking parasitical drain on Western Washington just doesn't do much for our state's dialog. Being a good liberal, perhaps I should ap--I'm not done sucking money from the WWA economy before leaving and spending it anywhere else yet.
Never mind.
2nd: Glad to see in above comment by ''Uncle Steve'' that he noticed our 4x8 Dino Rossi signs: A friend of mine and I spent several hours putting them up all over the Methow Valley. One of the BIAW signs we put up in Winthrop was thoroughly vandalized a couple months ago by one of those ''tolerant'' liberals. Fortunately we had a spare.
3rd: Tensor displays a classic left-wing Seattle liberal attitude towards Eastern WA; i.e.: ''why we should try to converse with you people''; and how DARE we not be subservient and grateful for all the government benefits we get from western WA tax money.
If we could just get out from under the oppressive and ever-growing State government rules and regulations imposed by the urban-liberal controlled State Legislature, you could keep your money (as long as we could keep ours, of course).
IOW: Tensor and his ilk can take that whole attitute and stick it in their ear. If that ain't good enough, they can find some other place to stick it.
The 133 count was an obviously incorrect ruling. It wasn't contested because there was no point if it was not going to change the election's outcome, but it absolutely would have been overturned on appeal if they had bothered.
I hope don't you need help figuring out why the ruling was incorrect, but in case you do: there is no reason to take the word of these felons that they voted for Rossi. In fact, a felon has every incentive in the world to lie at that point, and say they voted for the person they wanted to lose, in order to help their preferred candidate.
In the American democratic system, we do not ever take anyone's word for who they voted for. That is what the ballot is for. The judge was wrong (although I agreed with almost all of the rest of his ruling).
This is, of course, why the Republicans didn't bother asking any felons to testify, because it would've been pointless. The Democrats were being dishonest by asking their "votes" to be removed, and the judge was stupid for granting it, and it would have been overturned if challenged.
Basically, by talking about "133" you're just making Bridges look bad, and in doing so, calling the rest of his ruling into question.
Didn't notice the math error, hm? It's the lesser of the two mistaken statements on that sign, I'll give you that.
Tensor displays a classic left-wing Seattle liberal attitude towards Eastern WA; i.e.: ''why we should try to converse with you people''; and how DARE we not be subservient and grateful for all the government benefits we get from western WA tax money.
A judge in Eastern Washington explained the facts to you. If you still refuse to recognize them, why should any sane person attempt to engage you in a rational dialog?
If you can find a single example of anyone in Western Washington who ever demanded 'subservience', please do provide that quote. We all make an investment for our common good, and we here in Western Washington ask that you take our outsized contribution as an example of how much we want all of Washington state to prosper. You respond with false and insulting signs, impugning our civic integrity. Do you enjoy flaunting such poor character?
If we could just get out from under the oppressive and ever-growing State government rules and regulations imposed by the urban-liberal controlled State Legislature, you could keep your money (as long as we could keep ours, of course).
Please be specific. Which onerous regulations do you need removed? Please have your representatives contact ours in Olympia. That's their job; hold them to it.
IOW: Tensor and his ilk can take that whole attitute and stick it in their ear. If that ain't good enough, they can find some other place to stick it.
Take your hand out of my wallet, and you can engage in your fantasies about me to your heart's content. (Just don't tell me about them, yuck.) Meanwhile, slave away for the BIAW; it's not like they ever want to provide an honest day's pay for an honest day's work; they lack sufficient character.
The 133 count was an obviously incorrect ruling. It wasn't contested because there was no point if it was not going to change the election's outcome, but it absolutely would have been overturned on appeal if they had bothered.
No, no, no: "the political makeup of the state Supreme Court" rendered any appeal worthless. You must stay "on message", especially in the final days of the campaign! This site always contains an image of your Great Dear Maximum Leader for a reason!
I hope don't you need help figuring out why the ruling was incorrect, but in case you do: there is no reason to take the word of these felons that they voted for Rossi.
Which is why the intervenors provided corroborating evidence, such as records of large donations to the GOP.
In fact, a felon has every incentive in the world to lie at that point, and say they voted for the person they wanted to lose, in order to help their preferred candidate.
A person who has suffered the punishments we give to felons has intimate knowledge of how lying under oath can cause great personal grief. Please explain how a convict would prefer a prosecutor. (Lee, I hope you're reading; it should be comedy gold!)
This is, of course, why the Republicans didn't bother asking any felons to testify, because it would've been pointless.
No, it would have been counterproductive. Felons don't prefer prosecutors. "I hope don't you need help figuring out why."
The Democrats were being dishonest by asking their "votes" to be removed, and the judge was stupid for granting it, and it would have been overturned if challenged.
The Republicans had asked for an election to be overturned, based on (a) a statistical fallacy, and (b) "judicial activism" (to quote Judge Bridges). Compared to that, almost any other request would appear reasonable.
Basically, by talking about "133" you're just making Bridges look bad, and in doing so, calling the rest of his ruling into question.
The same ruling you (mostly) agree with, right? Why do you lack the courage of your convictions (pun FULLY intended)?
Posted by: tensor on November 1, 2008 11:02 PMYou with-held this evidence from the plaintiffs during their suit. Why?
Posted by: tensor on November 2, 2008 01:23 AMNo, no, no: "the political makeup of the state Supreme Court" rendered any appeal worthless. You must stay "on message" ...
Shrug. I said what I say now at the time. No sense in changing my mind now.
A person who has suffered the punishments we give to felons has intimate knowledge of how lying under oath can cause great personal grief. Please explain how a convict would prefer a prosecutor.
Um. Are you seriously saying that they would not lie about something that is impossible to verify, for fear of prosecution? Just how do you propose anyone finds out that they voted a certain way, and were therefore lying?
Damn, you say a lot of stupid things, but that's just about the stupidest.
The Republicans had asked for an election to be overturned, based on (a) a statistical fallacy
You're lying. In fact, the case they made was a good one, and not fallacious in the least bit. It just wasn't enough to overturn the election.
and (b) "judicial activism"
No, you're lying again, the Republicans never asked for it to be overturned based on judicial activism. That is what Bridges said it would have taken, but that is not what the GOP asked for.
The same ruling you (mostly) agree with, right? Why do you lack the courage of your convictions ... ?
Um. What? Are you seriously saying I should agree with the whole ruling if I am to agree mostly with it?
Do you understand law *at all*?
(No, you do not.)
Posted by: pudge on November 3, 2008 09:55 AMIsn't "Tensor" a brand of airplane glue?
Posted by: Das Baron Von Zippee on November 4, 2008 11:03 AM