GET OVER IT REPUBLICANS, ROSSI LOST

[J. J.]

hey, you did it to us for 4 years about Gore, now we can do it back. Fun, ain't it?

I'd have to see some real evidence that those were not valid votes or that valid votes were not counted before I complained.

"We" didn't do it to you so I see no reason to complain now.

[J. J.]

Congratulations Washington!  You're officially a third world country!

Fraudulent elections and preference for Osama over Bush.  I can't believe Democrats are actually proud that Murray survived.

Before we go screaming "fraud," let's let the investigation process play itself out.  For all I know, Rossi lost fair and square.  Wait for the evidence and, if it appears that there are enough irregularities to thow the election, I'll be screaming "fraud" as well.

[J. J.]

Congratulations Washington!  You're officially a third world country!

Fraudulent elections and preference for Osama over Bush.  I can't believe Democrats are actually proud that Murray survived.

Before we go screaming "fraud," let's let the investigation process play itself out.  For all I know, Rossi lost fair and square.  Wait for the evidence and, if it appears that there are enough irregularities to thow the election, I'll be screaming "fraud" as well.

I'm into calling it fraud now that I have a personal connection to it.  A friend of mine has been going to school in WA for 6 years now.  Never registered to vote out there because he always planned on moving back to NY when done.  He voted by absentee every year from his parent's address on Long Island.

He just found out that he was registered to vote in King County Washington and he voted absentee there this year.

Okay, find another 126 (there were a few like that) and you might have a case.

[J. J.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, actually. And no matter how obvious they may be, it's not a valid precedent for a revote. It's unfortunate, and I agree that no one really won, but Rossi needs to move on from this. I'm very pissed, too.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this point, but only as a matter of law.  CARLHAYDEN, cited precedent, from WA, where the courts have ordered revotes.  Now, if applicable to the governor's race (these are sometimes covered by separate constitutional provisions) and if it can be shown that 129 votes were counted that were from illegal voters, a revote might be legitimate.

Just for the record, I'm not overjoyed that this is the precedent, but it appears to be legitimate, from what I can tell over the Internet.

I have yet to see any evidence that 129 illegal voters voted.

[J. J.]

I have seen the very opposite (an RFC or something of that sort?), too. This is all so confusing.

Alcon, here is a link to the text of the decision:

http://www.mrsc.org/mc/courts/supreme/085wn2d/085wn2d0629.htm

Yes, I didn't expect it either, but it's here.  Look, I have the same problem with the revote that you, and a number of others, have, but it appears to be a possibly remedy. 

Of course, that assumes that 129 ballots can be shown to have been cast by illegal voters; I am not there yet.

[J. J.]

I am simply asking for what is fair: For Dino Rossi, the rightful Governor of Washington, to be allowed to assume the office.  No revote is necessary, though it is allowed.

Show me 130* illegally cast votes and I might agree with you.



*129 would mean a potential tie.

[J. J.]

These are reports, not verifications.  Investigate, get the evidence, and I'll be much more favorably inclined to see a revote.

For example, an address might be a private mailbox, but that does not mean that the voter is not legitimate.  It is entirely possible that all of those improperly (and I'll agree it was improperly) fed into the counting machines may have all come from legitimate voters.

Proof first, then, if necessary, remedy.

[J. J.]

JJ,

Check any of the Gubenatorial elections held in Presidential election years and you will consistently find fewer persons voting for Govenor that voted in the election.

This is known as 'roll-off.'

What happens is that some people who vote for President choose to not vote for Govenor (which comes after the federal offices on the ballot).

This is particularly true for new residents of a state and young/first time voters who may have little or no knowledge of the Gubenatorial candidates and came out to vote for President.

So, even in a hotly contested Gubenatorial race the vote for Govenor is typically less than the vote for President.

According to King county, there were 893,534 votes cast for President,  Hence the votes counted for President far exceeds the number of persons who can be shown to have voted.

Roll off does not constitute proof.  Interesting, yes.  Something that should draw attention, yes.  Proof, no.

My point is that it is very possible that voters decided to abstain for president, but decided to vote for governor.

[J. J.]

Yes, finding out you were registered without ever doing anything to register is pretty surprising.  FInding out you voted absentee is also a bit of a shock when you lived a block from the polling place, which you did not need since you voted absentee in another state already and never registered in Washington. 

J.J.  That there were about 1800 more voters than registered voters in King County is not unverified.  It comes from a simple check of voter rolls to the number of ballots.  It is shockingly simple and makes a strong case that there are 1800 illegal ballots in the count.

Tredrick, so far, there have been three or four reported cases, not even proven at this point, of someone not having voted who are recorded as having voted.  When that number reaches 129, you will have a good point.  We are not there as of this point.

Second, the list of registered votes is not complete.  Those 1800 voters may be very legitimate.

Look, I'm 100% in favor of continuing investigations of this, but before we get to the point screaming for a revote or overturning the election results by judical action, get some proof, not suspicions.

[J. J.]

In addition, is there any proof that these votes were cast for Gregoire?

It would seem to me that you'd have to prove not only that there were 129 illegal ballots, but rather that the number of illegal Gregoire votes exceeds the illegal Rossi votes by 129.

And in any event, if ballots can be proven to be invalid, I don't see why those invalid ballots can't just be thrown out. Why do we need a revote? Just toss the illlegal ballots, and adjust the count accordingly.

Okay, there are a couple of problems.  If there are illegall ballots, we might not know if they were cast for.  At the precinct level, it's possible that some could be factored out.  If Gregoire had 300 votes and Rossi 50 votes in one precinct, and it could be determined that there were 100 illegal ballots, we'd know that Gregoire had at least 50 illegal votes.  It's possible that this could be done, but it's unlikely.

You wouldn't have to prove that all the illegal ballots were for Gregoire to show that the result might have been affected by them.  That's the standard, and it's lower than proving Rossi won.  That's the problem I have with calling for a revote; there isn't a huge standard, in this case, and the WA courts have said that revoting can be an appropriate remedy.  It seems to be fairly easy to meet that standard, yet the people calling for a revote have yet to demonstrate that this standard has been met.

[J. J.]

You know what, even if you show me 130 votes I still say that Gregoire should remain governor. To change the result now with Gregoire inaugureated would be a terrible precedent, even if the election was obviously stolen. Ford is right on, Washington has become a third world country: They'd rather be blown up by Osama than be presided over by Bush, they'd rather cheat to have a Democrat governor than allow over 20 years of control over the statehouse to be broken, and there Republicans are worse at knowing when to quit than Al Gore.

The problem is, the precedent already exists in WA.  It has for about 30 years.

[J. J.]

I have not disputed that that the was improper action in King County, but that is not the issue.

It comes down to, can it be shown that there were 129 votes cast by ineligible voters.  That is not a high standard, but it has yet to be met.