Talk Elections

As I predicted, more ballots have been found in King county.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002228539_ballots02m.html

Dean Logan doesn't believe those ballots should be counted as they come predominatly from precincts won by Rossi.

Logan, who is being called upon to resign by a member of the county council is trying to shift blame to underlings.

Even the Secretary of State is having second thoughts in defending his old friend.

Hmm.

BTW, even the Democrat party has acknowledged in its filing with the court that the election was a complete mess.

The question remains as to how long Gregoire can drag out the legal process.

First, I don't see anyone saying that the vote count was error free.  Secnd, and most important, ever if all the votes went to Rossi (which is unlikely), he'd still come up short (by a smaller margin).

Ah, but this is just the tip of the iceberg.

So much has been found already, and filed with the judge, that even the Democrats in their filing, admitted the election was badly messed up.

Moreover, Logan tried to hide this particular piece of evidence, which has riled the judge.

There's a lot more which will become public in the next few weeks.

If and when enough of the iceburg bobs to the surface, I might change my opinion.  Get the evidence that this could make a difference and I might change my opinion.

There is precedent for a revote (and federal precedent for overturning a state election).

I posted this primarily to remind Alcon that I predicted this (yes, I do have inside knowledge).

As I earlier posted, a mass of evidence is emerging.

The smart Democrats in Washington will begin edging away from Gregoire, and those in King county will be acknowledging that it is time for Logan to depart.

If the Democrats don't seperate themselves from Gregoire and Logan, they're likely to go down with the ship.

There's a good chance this would widen Gregoire's victory if counted.

LOL. This thread makes me laugh.

You know, Carl, you may have a point, but 80% of Washington State's population no longer cares.

(EDIT: I do not mean to demean your predictions or anything - you are a very smart person and did a great job investigating this. I respect that to a huge degree. However, I think many in the state feel that it is time to move on, bring stability, and end this.)

Oddly enough, I agree.  I've been one of the Republicans that has not willing to call this a "stolen election," or suggest that their should be a revote.

We need proof to do either, and, so far, we do not have it.

Actually, Washington is a test case for the liberal Democrats.

Can you get away with stealing an election not by paying floaters, but by rigging the results.

More primitive methods of this type were used in the bygone days, but this is a sophisticated 'modern' version.

The bottom line of the question is why even bother to go to the expense of holding elections if the likes of Dean Logan are going to decide them?

Also (for Alcon), stonewalling doesn't work.

Word.

Well this election was probably stolen. No matter, Repulicans will probably steal it back next election and rightfully so.

Yes it is pleasant but very small potatos as payback for 2000.

What I find fascinating is that Rossi seems to have absolutely no plan to keep and use the "sympathy" support he gained after this ordeal. Instead, he's keeping the election going an extra half-year and slowly but surely eroding this extra support. Aside from the election, Gregoire hasn't done anything to piss anybody off yet, she's just doing her job.

Its doesn't matter how much "sympathy" or how many votes are cast for Rossi so long as Logan is 'counting' the votes.

There general concensus among posters on this thread is that, 'so, the election was stolen.'

No one has bother to answer my earlier question as to why one should even bother to have elections if they are to be routinely stolen.

I, for one, have not used the term "stolen."  Obviously, errors were made, but as of this monent, there is no evidence that these errors have effected the result.

The question becomes a definitional one.

When one disobeys a clear state law regarding the process of counting votes, is this merely a "mistake"?

When the disobedience of the law favors one party/candidate, is this merely a "mistake,"

When there is a pattern of cover up and lies about the vote count, is this merely a "mistake"?

Just how massive must the "mistakes" be to render the election results void?

Has this not run its course yet?

Dave

The inauguration is over. Washington has its governor. Rossi is an idiot, and if he wants a political career, he can come to his senses, quit acting like a 5 year old, and run for the Senate.

Right now, he's just destroying his chances of being elected to anything.

The "mistakes" would have to be enough to effect the results; they are not there, yet.

Oh god, when will this issue die?

I have NOT yet posted most of the grisly details, which do far exceed the margin of victory.

My point of this particular thread is that months after the election, more evidence emerges of Logan's perfidity.

Slowly the story is seeping out.

If you remember my predictions  (which were denied by others here at the time), they have come to pass.

I notice that everyone is skipping around the basic question of why bother to hold an election if the vote counter will alter the results?

Okey Dokey

Someone needs to take Rossi and take the Democrats that ran the King County counting effort and deport them. 

Carl, I'm not "stonewalling." "Stonewalling" suggests that I am delaying something, which would require actually having some power on my part to delay anything. Do you not think there is any merit to the argument that the state should probably not have a change in administration five months after the first election?

As to your question: Washington State generally has smooth elections, and as a resident of it, I am very proud of that. This was a screw up. We need to fix the situation, but "routinely stolen"? We have elections that Republicans win - you can claim that the election was stolen if you like, but arguing that because you believe one close election was stolen, democracy of pointless is arguing that you should throw away the entire crop just because one banana is bruised.

We can fix this problem. Dwelling on this election like Republicans are currently is not the way to fix it - more talk about how to prevent this from happening again, not more whining about it happening.

Alcon, first, I have not used the word "stolen" and I'm complete agreement with you on that point.

Second, there is precedent in Washington for ordering a revote, if the result cannot be determined.  There is also Federal precedent for a court to overturn a state election, if there is evidence that there was enough fraud to indicate that outcome would have been different but for the fraud.  This happened in a Phila State Senate Race in the mid 1990's (Marx (R) was eventual winner).

Now, I'm not overjoyed with either, but they are there.  An this point, I don't see either coming into play, but the possibility is out there, unfortunately.

How many graveyard voters have been found so far?
How many "lost" votes have been "discovered" so far?

Sadly, this doesn't seem any more crooked than most big city machines.  Just close enough of a race this time that it might have mattered.

Not enough, so far.

First, can you please cite the post where I suggested YOU were "stonewalling"?

Second, you argument that since Gregoire managed to reach the Govenor's chair, she should be left there, even if it is found that she was not actually supported by a plurarilty of the voters is without merit.

Third, outside of King county, elections in Washington are generally are fair and competent.  King county is another matter.

Fourth, if Gregoire is allowed to keep her ill gotten gains, it will reward cheating.

Fifth, yes, Logan wants to "fix" more elections.

Sixth, if you REALLY want to stop these problems in the future, join in the call to fire Logan!

It seems that this dispute is going on far longer than 2000, which Gore clearly should have won.

Same problem there as here; no proof.

Even if you ignore the recount which was ended, it's clear that each of the following ndependently cost Gore the election

- The scrub list, denying the right to vote to people with felony convictions in *ahem* 2006.
- The Palm Beach butterfly ballot
- Duval County ballot
- Much higher rates of votes not counted in minority areas
- Absentee ballots modified by Republican officials after they were recieved

And?  The ballot construction didn't violate any law (and in at least one case was appoved by a Democrat and Democratic Party officials had a chance to review and object prior to the elect). 

Felony conviction bars voting in both sates and their have been complaints from Rossi that felons voted in WA.

As for the minority voters, perhaps there should have better instruction of first time (or few times) voters.

I've said in both cases, provide real evidence.

She was a DINO< she appeared a lot with Harris and Jeb, and was defeated by the Democrats last year.
The scrub list barred people from voting who did not have a felony.
The machines were set to accept invalid votes in minority areas, while they would reject them (and tell you do your vote again) in non-minority areas. It wasn't minority voters being stupid that led to the differences.

Carl, first prove King County was stolen. And no, sh**tty right-wing extremist blogs aren't "proof."

Second, the Republicans vehemently opposed the counting of ballots found earlier. But now they're for the whole thing just to take more shots at King County. They said in court that no more votes should be counted, and now they're saying every vote should be counted...okay...

Even if EVERY vote was for Rossi, Gregoire would still win. Find at least 129 votes not counted so it could possibly change the election.

The state Republican Party said that they estimated that if the votes were counted, Gregoire would only win be 125 votes...instead of 129...

There will always be uncertainty in a close election. Of course, Republicans seem to think that EVERY dead person and felon votes Democrat, which is just not true. Plenty of Republicans do it too.

A University of Washington study estimated that Washington had one of the lowest margin of errors when it came to voting in the country. And for this election, the margin would have been 29,000 votes.

She was a DINO< she appeared a lot with Harris and Jeb, and was defeated by the Democrats last year.
The scrub list barred people from voting who did not have a felony.
The machines were set to accept invalid votes in minority areas, while they would reject them (and tell you do your vote again) in non-minority areas. It wasn't minority voters being stupid that led to the differences.

She was still a Democrat and, IIRC, all parties had a chance to challenge the ballot construction prior to the election.

I've never said that minority voters were "studid," just that there wwere a lot of new or infrequent voters in minority areas.  I question your claim that the machines were set differently in minority areas.

So far as I've seen, there were no claims that someone who tried to vote, and didn't have a conviction, was not permitted to vote.  There were cases in WA where felons, banned from voting did vote (and, yes, at least one voted for Rossi).

Since you used the QUOTE function in a way that makes it hard to format a reply, I'll have to just reply like this.

History is not my best subject, so I'm afraid I have to wing it for your metaphor and may present something poorly. Although Watergate was unfortunate, the difference with Watergate is that the President quite obviously ordered fraud. Did Gregoire?

As for King County being the only problem: not really. Ballots were found in other counties, although in lesser number. Still, some eastern Washington counties found ballots, and are less populated. It's a statewide problem, and just fixing King County's problems isn't going to solve the problem. We need to yet again become a picture of how elections should be done - not just pretend that Seattle is the only problem.

But Alcon, there was NEVER any evidence that Nixon ordered the Watergate breakin.

So, under your logic, Nixon should have been left alone?

Also, there is a difference between honest minor errors (non King County) and monumental violations of state laws (King county).

The minor errors outside King county can be rectified by greater training of election officials.

The actions in King county are NOY simple errors, but rather deliberate ly flouting state regulations>

Would you like me to start penning the TV drama - cos this just runs and runs .......................

Dave

It should be over in a few months.

Depends upon how long the Gregoire lawyers can drag out the process, and the determination of the judge to conclude the trial.

Hilarious

An excerpt from a Seattle Times article about even more problems with the King County vote:


King County election officials said a key document accounting for absentee ballots in the November election was so flawed it was virtually meaningless.

The Mail Ballot Report, which showed every absentee ballot accounted for, didn't report the correct number of ballots returned by voters. Instead, it simply added the number of ballots counted and the number rejected to show a perfectly matching number of ballots returned.

The improperly reported information came to light after officials learned that 93 valid absentee ballots weren't counted in the election.

Elections-office spokeswoman Bobbie Egan said it isn't known why the author of the report, absentee-ballot facility chief Nicole Way, didn't correctly account for ballots. "This is part of an ongoing investigation, and we cannot comment at this time," Egan said.

Way, who was placed on paid administrative leave Tuesday, could not be reached for comment. Two other staffers were suspended as well, pending completion of an investigation. A fourth worker was suspended yesterday.

"Oh, she knows better than that," Way's one-time boss, former Elections Manager Bob Bruce, said yesterday.

In calculating the number of returned ballots by adding up ballots counted and ballots rejected, Bruce said, "You have a false figure. ... If you're not keeping track of how many came in to start with, you don't have much of a check."

More to come...

As I noted earlier, this should be wrapped up latter this year.

It really depends upon how much stalling by Gregoire's lawyers the judge is willing to tolerate.

Credible rumors suggest the judge is a mite unhappy by the way King county has been less than forthcoming with honest answers.

Stories about the 2000 FL Presidential vote were still carried through the 2004 election. So, I'd guess 2008, or the next WA Gov election, whichever comes first. :)

:(

And I thought I was the only paranoid, conpiracy theorist on this forum.

I'm intested to see the King County Executive race later this year!

It looks like the Republicans will be throwing out another Sammamish Republican to take on Sims. Will King County actually vote against a Democrat, trying to purge itself of the voting problems? Will King County voters re-elect Sims in a landslide again, responding negatively to the GOP's anti-King County stance? Or is pointless since it is King County?

As long as Logan is 'counting' the votes, Sims is s shoo in.

I asked how King County voters will vote, not how in your conspiracy theory world Dean Logan will count votes.

Are you Republicans going to tell me that Washington's Republican secretary of state stole this for the Democrats?

Update

The depositions should be publicly available soon.

I have had a look at the crucial ones (Logan and his associate Huennenks).

Bad news for Gregoire.

Further update.

Have had a chance to see (with exception of sealed portion)  the Logan deposition.

As much as I despise the little weasel, I almost feel sorry for him.  Its clear he thought he could contain the situation by stonewalling.

He never thought that anyone would take the time to carefully check up on the multiple inconsistencies.

He has already tried to dump the blame on subordinates, which has just antagonized even more people into providing evidence.

The question is, when he realizes he cann't divert blame to subordinates, will he point to others?

Futher update. CARLHAYDEN is a liar.

While I enjoy the update, this still isn't proof that that Gregoire lost the election or that there are enough invalid votes to throw out the results.

Logan shifting the blame only proves that he's a beaurocrat.  :-)

JJ

There already is in hand (in the judge's hands) enough evidence.

We're merely waiting for the process to be completed.

When it's completed, you'll have a story.  We need evidence of the correct count or proof of the invalid ballots.

Oh, come on. The Sec. of State is a Republican. He certified the election, saying there was no fraud. And the Republicans called Al Gore a sore loser. Geez, move on people.

What was that phrase that was so popular with republicans a few short years ago..

Oh yes,

Further update:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/222211_election29.html

The statistical method suggested by the GOP should not be used; I'm with the Dems on that one.

Call the ineligible voters in, under oath, and make them state how they voted.

First, it is illegal to try to compel someone to say how they voted.

Second, it is unethical.

Officer: "Well, Crazy Jimbob, did you or did you not kill 600 people with a KaBar?"

Crazy Jimbob: "Nope"

Officer: Well, that settles that, you're free to go.  That's all the evidence I need."

Wouldn't we want a little more to go on than the word of established law breakers?

That law should obviously be repealed.

There have been two recent cases in Texas where voters have been required to indicate who they had voted for, one was in a Democrat primary in 1992, and the other was a state representative race in 2004.

Check Article VI., Section 6. of th Constitution of the State of Washington.

There better a lot more evidence than Jimbo's answer, either way, to the question.

Here is what the contstitutional section really says:

All elections shall be by ballot. The legislature shall provide for such method of voting as will secure to every elector absolute secrecy in preparing and depositing his ballot.

"Preparing and depositing" is far different than "disclosing by way of a court order."

There is nothing either illegal or unethical in this.

Secrecy in preparing the ballot is denied if a voter is compelled to disclose how he prepared the ballot.

No, after the fact, the court could order him to reveal his vote.  This cannot influence how he cast his vote.

As pointed out by Jimrtex, there is precedent for it.

First, there is no question that the wording is not a precise as could be desired.

Second, there is a long history in Washington supporting secrecy of the vote (when I have more time I'll try to give you cites on this).

Third, the attempt to compel a voter to disclose how he voted is unethical for several reasons:

a. are you going to imprison someone for refusing to disclose their vote, but not for voting illegally?

b. how do you deal with a witness who lies (and how would you know)?

The bottom line which everyone is ignoring is that there are far more illegal votes counted than the margin of 'victory.'

Lets hold the election where the rules are complied with, and see the results.

Democrats now claim 544 felon voters in 2004 election

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?category=6420&slug=WA+Felon+Voters&dpfrom=tsto

As I understand it, the persons in question were not qualified electors (under VI.1 and VI.3).  Section 6 only applies to electors.  If the persons in question were not electors, then they are not protected.

In the Texas cases, the voters in question were not eligible to vote in the particular election being contested (one was a Norweigan, though most simply had voted in a district that they were not resident of).  Not all the ineligible voters were able to be contacted.  Ultimately, it was decided that their votes could not be based on a projection of the votes of those who were located.

jimrtex,

The situation in Washington is far more complex.

First, there were a number of votes counted which never went throught the verification process (contrary to state law).

Second, a number of people cast both absentee and precinct ballots (both were counted, again contrary to state law).

Third, a number of dead people rose from the grave and voted (tell me how you're going to hie them into court to ask them how they voted).

Fourth, a number of convicted felons not restored to their civil rights voted (again, contrary to state law).  While those that can be found can be (theoretically taken to court to seek identification of their vote), this will NOT happen in Washington.

Fifth, there are other problems with the vote in that apparently valid votes were discarded (King County).

1.  Can be fixed, or at least determined (though I'd be interested in knowing what law is violated).

2, 3, 5.  Is part of #1.

4.  Why not?

You apparently don't understand.

In a number of precincts in King County, ballots were processed which were unverified.  There is NO way whatsoever of seperating them.

With respect you your other statement, let me be equally as pity, abeit on point.  You just don't seem to understand.
Its not that you lack the intellect to understand, but simply have decided that once an election is stolen, the thief must get away with it.

No one (except perhaps you) argues that there were several thousand ballots counted that should NOT have been counted.

The number of ballots counted illegimately (by the way I have previously on other threads listed the Washington Administrative Code sections involved) are far more than the 'margin' of victory.

There is a line between healthy skepticism, and obstinate unwillingness to accept basic facts.

You're now at that line.

First of all, you can quantify the number of improper ballots, and in the case of provisonal ballots, there should be a record of who voted.  I'm not yet seeing a problem of not being able to determine if these voters were legitimate or not, and if now, for whom the voted for.

You seem to have confused "counted illegitimately" with "votes cast by people not entitled to vote."  They are two different things.  There should be a record of who voted, including who cast provisional ballots.  The might be 1000 votes that were "counted illegitimately" and we might find out that 950 of them were votes of people entitled to vote.

What you are suggesting might be the ex post facto deprivation of the right to vote of most, if not all, of these people.  Get some evidence that these people were ineligible to vote, if possible factor out those votes, and then look at the situation.  I will admit that you are closer to the possibility of a re-vote (or judicial overturning of the result), but you still have a long way to go.

Opebo is a mayor?

Let me make it simple for you.

First, (as I previously noted) how are you going to determine how the dead voted?

Second, how are you going to determine that when it is clear that a convicted felon voted illegally, the way that person voted?  Will you just take their word for it?  Will you take their word for it that they were never guilty of the crime(s) for which they were convicted.

Third, due to the failure of King County to follow the procedures established by law, it is impossible to selecte out the multiple votes cast or in many instances the provisional ballots improperly tabulated.

Let me see if I can make it simple for you.  You will have to show that that the there were enough dead/fiticious persons voting to have affected the result.  You have not.  That it did occur is not enough to challenge the election.

Second, some have come forward in the press, and disclosed whom the have voted.  Yep, saying how they voted, under oath is one way of determining this and some have stated that voted for Gregoire.

Third, in King County there should be a record of the voters, not whom they voted for.  You are claiming that because the county didn't follow the procedures, that the votes of potentially legitimate voters shouldn't be counted.  Before throwing these out, there should be a check to determine if these voters are legitimate.  That hasn't happed yet.  You are very probably talking about disqualifying the votes of some legitimate voters.

There is, IIRC a 126 difference between the two candidates.  Show that 126 votes were not cast by legitimate voters and that the cannot be factored out, and we can begin to talk about changing the result.

Until that level is reached, you have a whole bunch of nothing.

I would not count on that.  Texas House contest  (http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/legal/contest_pdf/HeflinVsVo_MasterReport.pdf) there were 13 categories of votes that were either illegal votes, or were legal votes and should have been counted.

Can these ballots be identified, or the person who cast the vote be determined?   In Texas there were provisional votes without the correct retrieval code.

That is category 6 in the Texas case.

Find the person who cast the ballot, or you are out of luck.  I don't see any dead people in the Texas contest, but there was a vote by a Norwegian, and several Nigerian-Americans who had their registration address switched to an adjacent district, where a Nigerian-American was challenging an African-American in a primary contest, and some voters were denied the right to vote.

Then Rossi has lost.

Where are the ballots.

If the Washington court adopts the standard used in Texas, then Rossi has lost unless the choice of the illegal voters is determined.  "Might of won" is not going to get a new election.

I doubt that any dead people voted.  Find who cast the ballot.

If you are going to discard a vote, you better have very good proof that the vote was illegal.  Right to vote trumps right to get elected.

Is this the republican version of Florida 2000. please dont bother to be the lawyer and provide a case of why its different. result is a result.

you know the feeling when you know your hockey team clearly deserved to win but some how finds a way to lose. you feel frustrated? same feeling here for republicans?

MissCatholic,  please note that several of the people here demanding proof of violations before there is any attempt to overturn the results are Republicans. 

Just for the record, I did not oppose the initial recounting in FL, only the attempts by Gore to expand the scope of it after the first ones were unsuccessful.  Had he asked for a full recount immediately after the election, I would have been supportive.

First, to list all the specific names of the persons who:

a.) were deceased at the time they supposedly voted, or
b.) cast more than one ballot, or
c.) where not legally entitled to vote but did so (felony convictions) would take up too much of this forum, and my time.  There has been an implication made that I am some how making up these points.

In category one, two names which have been released to the press as deceased long before the November election, but who supposedly cast a ballot in that election are:

John A. Fey (Seattle) died in May of 2004
Joe D. Burk (Seattle) died in May of 2004.

In the category of those casting more than one ballot in the 2004 gubenatorial election is Dustin S O'Coilain of Seattle.

A rather lengthy list of the convicted felons who cast votes in the 2004 Governor's race despite not having had their civil rights restored, is available, although the Democrats are NOT denying this in court!

In yet another specific example, Precinct 1823 in King Counted counted 343 ballots, while there were only 272 voters listed as having voted!!!

Finally, this thread started with the citation of ballots which were found but not counted because they came from precincts in King county carried by Rossi.

Let's ask them how they voted :P

I'm waiting for JJ to suggest using voodoo to bring them back from the dead!

Seriously, its nice to see one person who has a grasp of the problems.

So far, you have a total of three invalid votes, assuming that there are not two Mr. O'Coilain's out there.  (Junior and Senior would be a possibility.)  Rossi lost by more than three.

I have implied that you are "some how making up these points."  I have stated, point blank, that you have to show there were not yet enough of this to void the election, and you still have not.  I have also stated that, prior to any revoting or declaring Rossi the winner, efforts should be made to clear up how illegal voters voted.

That'll take some digging.

Yes, and if Rossi lost by two votes, there would be a case.  He lost by more, so it still hasn't been shown, as of yet.

I'm going to venture back into this thread and ask a question i asked a few weeks back.  No one answered then, either Carl or JJ.

How many ballots were cast improperly?  That is how many people voted twice, how many voters were dead, how many voters were ineligible to vote but did anyway, etc.

What is the margin of victory in the race?

I apologize that your questions were not answered sooner.

First, the most recent 'certified' margin of victory is 129 votes.

Second, the number of questioned votes amounts to several thousand.  They're broken down into the following categories:

a. In many counties, more ballots were counted than there are registered voters identified as voting.

b. In at least one county, many provisional ballots were placed directly into counting machines on election day rather than being reviewed and validated to ensure that they were cast by eligible voters who did not cast another ballot.

c. Illegitimate votes were cast by convicted felons whose civil rights were not restored, deceased persons, and persons other than the registered voter whose ballot was voted.

d. Ballots were “enhanced” and altered in a manner that permanently obscures the original mark of the voter, in violation of state law.

e. Counties treated voters inconsistently in their decisions whether to count ballots that were incorrectly rejected.

f. Inconsistent and changing standards were employed in determining when a ballot was an overvote or and undervote.

g. Private information about provisional ballot voters was released, and third parties were allowed to use that private information to procure documents seeking to validate the ballots.

The exact number in each category is yet to be determined by the court, but, BOTH sides in the court action in their filings agree that the number is far in excess of the number constituting the margin of victory!

It is my informed judgement that when all is said and done, the court will find that somewhere between six to seven thousand vote counting errors occured.

These errors disprorportionatedly occured in areas that added votes for Gregoire relative to Rossi, and in ways that disproportionately aided Gregoire (note that 'found' votes from precincts won by Gregoire in King county were counted, but 'found' votes in Rossi precincts were NOT - see link at start of this thread).

My particular problem is that we have yet to establish the "six to seven thousand vote counting error" or a six to seven hundred or a six to seven vote error.  For example, a lot is being made of the inclusion of the provisional ballots in the count.  We don't how many of those were due to legitimate voters voting.  In some cases the "felons" have come forward and stated that the voted for Rossi (and seem to be willing to do so under oath).

When there is a demonstration that a net 129 of these votes were either for Gregoiri or that at least 129 votes were illegally cast and that who they voted for cannot be determined, I'll be the one questioning the result.  Rossi has not yet reached that level of proof.

You have yet to answer the earlier question.

Specifically, will you take the word "under oath,' of the convicted felons that they were NOT guilty of the crime(s) for which they were convicted?

Should their convictions be overturned soley based on their sworn testimony?

Then why do you give any credibility other statements on their part?

I tend to give them a lot of credibility, expecially since this isn't a "self incrimination" situation (and I'd be willing to see them given immunity).  I doubt it there was an organized effort to get ex-felons to vote.

We've seen (mentioned in another thread) one voter state that they voted for one candidate and one vote for the other.

One thing that should be pointed out is what the Secretary of States office says about felons voting:



Now, I wonder how many people released thought that because they were not under parole and had discharged their sentences, that the DoC had restored their right to vote?  DoC seems to be able to do that under its own authority, possibly without telling the ex-felon.

I'm seeing a conspiracy of ex-felons to throw an election.

I'll add that this doesn't make their votes valid, but with these regulations, I can understand the confusion.

Here's a pretty good explanation of the wide variety of provisions in state law which were violated in King county.

http://crokersack.blogspot.com/2005/05/repeat-after-me-state-law-requires.html

Thanks for the answers, guys.

From all outward appearances, I have determined the following.

Average turnout is say, 55%.  "Turnout" in some counties was over 100%.  This is fraud on a massive scale.  At this point, FEC oversight/management of future Washington election is an order as its plainly obvious that these people have no intention of running a legitimate electoral system.

Actually John, outside of King county the administration of the election was probably as good or better than the national average.

In King county, the administration was a disaster.

Just an update.

Everybody should keep an eye on the testimony of Nicole Way.

Further update:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002283310_election21m.html

This is getting pretty lame.

Now you know how some of us felt with Florida in 2000...

"Never argue with an idiot... they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience...."

The trial is proceeding with about the results I expected.

It will be interesting to see the results.

It will be interesting to see if there is any proof that Rossi won.

I've seen Ohio turnout figures of over 100%, but actually it wasn't any sort of conspiracy, their spreadsheet just added up wrong.

Even that didn't drag on as long as this saga (it's going to be dramatised for TV at this bleeding rate) and, in the grand scheme of things, I think a contested presidential election result  is more important than a gubnatorial one

This will just run and run ... Florida by comparison was over and done with, comparatively, quicky

Dave

But if Gore and the Dems had their way, we're talking about that recount going into January. That was hard to end.

Anyway, the judge ruled against Rossi this afternoon and it will be appealed to the State Supreme Court.

Rossi is NOT appealing.

Even he doesn't care anymore. You are the only person on earth who gives a damn about this anymore. what does this mean?

YOU ARE NOT A DEMOCRAT.

In all fairness, CARL is not claiming to be a Democrat.

First, I have claimed, and continue to claim I am a Democrat, and have been (in the past) a party official.

Second, JJ and fairness have nothing to do with one another.

Third, I would have voted for the Libertarian candidate in Washington as I did not like Rossi.

Fourth, I don't care who 'won' an election, when it is achieved by fraud.

Fifth, I believe that the illegals voters should be prosecuted, irrespective as to how they voted.

Sixth, I don't believe that Logan should get to pick and choose which votes he counts (see the begining of this thread).

Seventh, I don't believe we should count votes cast in the names of dead people who died before they could have received a ballot.

Eighth, I believe we should prosecute those who cast more than one vote in an election, irrespective of who they cast their vote for/against.

Ninth, I believe that the rules for counting votes should be followed  counting of provisional ballots until and unless verified).

Tenth, I believe the number of ballots counted should NOT exceed the number of voters who voted.

To me, these are reasonable points.

To JJ, once an elections is stolen, it must stay stolen, as finality is more important than following the rules.

   

BTW Alcon, Washington has given control over state elections to Dean Logan.

He uses an old technique once used in Cook county, Illinois of waiting until the votes are counted outside King county, and then finds enough votes to overwhelm the rest of the state.

So, ultimately, Dean Logan is the behind the scenes ruler of Washington.

It doesn't matter how the votes are cast as long as Dean Logan is counting (or not counting) them.