GET OVER IT REPUBLICANS, ROSSI LOST

[Alcon]

A few comments:

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

Anyone who took four years to get over Gore has attachment issues. When all hope is lost, there is no sense in dwelling in the past.

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.

I've been wanting to find opportunity to say this for a while, J. J., but you are among my favorite members of this forum. You are a conservative (or maybe not on social issues - whatever) but rail against those of your idealogy who make no sense. That is very cool of you.

Rossi won, but he doesn't get to be Governor.  Oh well, Washington's loss.  Ultimately, it will also tarnish the state Democratic Party to have "found" all these King County votes and Rossi can have almost any job he wants in that state now.  Look out Senator Patty "Osama Mama" Murray.

Not much to reply to in this post. I'm surprised, John, that you'd make a post like this without explaining yourself. I know of very few people who watch this election closely and are convinced of a Rossi win.

Nethercutt was perhaps the worst Senate candidate the Republicans ran in the country (other than Alan Keyes, of course).  Not a good comparison.

Actually, you are very much incorrect here. It's funny - I thought Nethercutt would give Murray a run for her money. Despite Nethercutt's "Osama" ad,  the electorate was little-affected. Murray did better among Republicans (9%) than Nethercutt among Democrats (5%) and Murray slaughtered Nethercutt for the independent vote (57%-41%). The same goes for ideaologies: Murray gets more conservatives (17%) than Nethercutt liberals (8%). Murray got the moderates 63%-36%.

Murray also had a good perception at the end. Murray was seen as the better candidate in the fields of intelligence (91%), bringing change (87%), and caring about people (75%). Nethercutt had a better one, though: he won the votes of those who thought it most important that the candidate be honest/trustworthy (57%), a strong leader (72%), and take clear stands on issues (70%). He also won the usual auto-Republican category of religious faith (86%).

Nethercutt ran a great campaign. However, at the end, he began to become annoying. When he didn't poll well, he went into attack mode. Then he went into creepy family guy mode and began to look like an Eggland's Best commercial - ads with his wife featuring "outtakes."

By the way, the Osama bin Laden comment was a simplification, but made in an appropriate context: a speech about why we have perception problems in the Middle East. She was not saying we should be more like him. Investigators call the remark mostly accurate, but still way too simplistic. I agree. She shouldn't have said it. It wasn't a travesty.

[Alcon]

Rossi won, but he doesn't get to be Governor.  Oh well, Washington's loss.  Ultimately, it will also tarnish the state Democratic Party to have "found" all these King County votes and Rossi can have almost any job he wants in that state now.  Look out Senator Patty "Osama Mama" Murray.

Not much to reply to in this post. I'm surprised, John, that you'd make a post like this without explaining yourself. I know of very few people who watch this election closely and are convinced of a Rossi win.

My explaination is pretty simple.  We won, you didn't like the outcome, so you counted again.  You still didn't win, so you bought a recount and you found enough votes to "win".  Never mind the obvious problem we should all have with a political party being allowed to have as many recounts as it is willing to buy, the alleged Governor, Ms. Gregoire, won on what appear outwardly to be fraudulent votes.

Actually, Mr. Ford, it is you who oversimplify.

State law mandated the first count. Before that count, both parties agreed on a second, hand recount. That was supposed to be the final one.

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.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will cut you slack because overall it seems pretty obvious you are not really following this very, very closely (otherwise you'd know about the recount rules). What you say is fundamentally true, and what a lot of Washingtonians think, including me - the election was flawed. However, the subsequent process that resulted in a Gregoire win was by the numbers, although I don't love those numbers.

[Alcon]

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.

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

[Alcon]

Alcon,

If you're following this as closely as you say you have, then you are lying about one point.  You present Rossi as a willing participant in the second recount.  He had this to say about the prospect of a second recount:

"This really is sad and desperate," he said. "How much do they want to put the voters of Washington through? We were elected and certified twice. I have faith in voters; Christine Gregoire has faith in lawyers."

Alcon, you are so full of crap to say that Rossi happily went along with the recount.

I am well aware of the rule stipulating a second reoc**nt, I am also aware that Rossi won.  We won two out fo three, in most things that's good enough.  It seems that you, however, are not at all aware that this is in fact precedent for a re-vote, and that Washington has laws allowing for exactly this phenomenon.  And I have not asked for a re-vote by the way, so don't put words in my mouth saying I did.  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.

I want to reply to this because I forgot about it. Sorry.

I have been under the impression that the Republicans and Democrats agreed to this beforehand. In fact, I have read this in many places. I may be wrong, but if anything, it was because I was too trusting with the source. Looking back at my post, it sounded inappropriately aggressive - I apologize, and I do if I was wrong. However, this is what I have been told; I would not lie about something like this.

I personally think you are a bit overconfident that Rossi won, but are very much entitled to your opinion. I do not, on the other hand, concur with your "two out of three" logic. The third count included new ballots from other counties, too; without them, Gregoire still would have won. Rossi counties added new ballots, too. It's all a mess.

Above all, though, I apologize for the poor tone of my post. I do not know what was wrong with me; I am not normally like this when discussing things. I have great respect for you as a poster and hold your opinions in high regards. If I made that post and knew at the time it sounded angry, I was not of sound mind. My deepest apologies.