Slashdot Mirror
Democrat Certified Winner in WA Governor Race
Washington's secretary of state certified the result of the hand recount (the third count) in the governor's race, reversing the first two results -- which Republican Dino Rossi had won -- and making Democrat Christine Gregoire the election's second governor-elect, by 129 votes out of 2.9 million. The inauguration is January 12. Predictably, the two sides have switched arguments, too, with the Democrats saying Rossi should concede and the Republicans saying they have a duty to make sure the will of the people is followed. The next step may be an election contest, which could take months, and result in a court awarding the victory to a candidate, nullifying the entire election, or sending the matter to the legislature. Rossi is calling for the legislature to pass a special law calling for a new election, which would bypass a contest procedure.
Which makes it clear that neither side cares about the will of the people, as long as they win.
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
As a Republican I root for the elephant's, but I am not about to go turning over flaming cars and seceding from the union if a Democrat gets in office.
What ever happened to "reasoned" debate? A legitimate difference of opinion? At the risk of sounding like we should all just get along, there is merit to the idea that if we, the left and the right, are working for the betterment of the people... then no one loses.
Of course, as long as government suckles at the teat of corrupt corporate influence peddlers, as well as letting the dog get wagged by the tail of the marginally disenfranchised then we will have partisan bickering that lowers us all.
Whoa, better step down from this soap box... it gives me such a head rush...
...But I digress. TREMBLE PUNY HUMANS!ONE DAY MY SPECIES WILL DESTROY YOU ALL!
As mentioned in an earlier post, 266 ballots seemed to disappear, while 325 magically materialized. Again, these are not just a matter of reinterpration of marks on paper, these are entire sheets of paper that either vanished or appeared out of thin air. Christine Gregoire added a net 47 new votes to her total, Dino Rossi lost a net 12 from his.
In the first count, Rossi was ahead by 261 votes. In the second count, Rossi ended up ahead by 42 votes. In the final count, Gregoire was ahead by 129 votes. The total number of votes cast were 2.8 million. Anyone see a problem here?
The problem is that we're well within the margin of error. To get an accurate count, we need to be more precise than 0.01%. The fact that a few votes here and there seemed to disappear and reappear are just statistical anomalies. That alone is not proof of fraud.
If Rossi just keeps his mouth shut and behaves as a gracious winner...
Right, because it is good for your Democrat to follow the legal process to challenge the election result when she lost, but not good for the Republican to do it when he lost.
The hypocrisy of the Democrats here would be stunning if it weren't so predictable.
"The hypocrisy of the Democrats here would be stunning if it weren't so predictable."
:)
As a Republican I think saying that is hypocritical of you sir.
I don't think the Democrats have a monopoly on hypocrisy. Republicans asked Gregoire to shutup and conceed when she was 42 votes down & still had recourse in the law as it exists now. Now they aren't exactly practicing what they preach & are even asking for new law to be made to handle an election that has already happened.
To paraphrase every Republican for the last four years:
Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
Dino Rossi has no more legal process.
He has two options, both outlined in the story: asking the legislature to step in, and contesting the election.
Rossi is asking for a recount - something not provided for in the legal process.
Yes, it is. The legislature making laws is very clearly provided for in the law.
He has lost.
And Gregoire had lost before yesterday. So what?
Gregoire asked for what she's entitled to under state law and won, Rossi's asking for a whole new law
Something he is entitled to ask for.
Sorry, there's simply no difference. There are legal avenues open, and Rossi is taking them as he sees fit, which is his right. Just as Gregoire did.
Look, I didn't say Gregoire should concede. I supported her right to pursue all available legal avenues. And now I support Rossi's right to do the same. I won't be a hypocrite, like most everyone else.
New Theme, Count till you win. If that is not enough, a magical box of ballets will apear and then count till you win. If that is not enough, repeat previous....
Oh, but this is a troll.
But this is the what happened...
Sad...
The hypocrisy of the Democrats here would be stunning if it weren't so predictable.
Hehe those of us outside the two party system see it for what it really is.
The Democrats and Republicans are simply trying to make sure their person wins. Does it matter if they actually won? Hell No!!! If we've seen anything there is no such thing as morality in politics. The ends always justify the means.
Its okay if we stuff the ballot with our candidate because the other side is probably doing it too, and even then, their candidate is just good at making people believe his lies, so we're actually doing the public a favor by cheating.
I KNOW people who would agree that cheating is morally acceptable for those reasons. Its sickening.
The way to motivate people is to make them believe that THEY are under attack from the "enemy". Or that they are in danger from the "enemy". Or their families, values, etc.But the politicians aren't out for the betterment of the people. They are out to get power and to keep power.There is that, also.
Although I'd look at it differently. I see it as people fighting to get the power so they are the ones getting the corporate attentions.
Politics is now about getting power and holding power. The easiest way to do that is fear and hate. The worst way is through rational discussion and mutual respect.
Yeah, the Democrats cry when they're losing and there are votes that weren't counted that might give them a win.
Yeah, the Republicans are demanding that every vote should be counted now that might give them a win.
!!!BUT!!!
NEITHER side demands that "every vote be counted" when their side is winning. Then it is all about the other side being a "gracious loser" and such.
And that tells you that neither party is interested in counting all the votes, just enough so that they win.
It's all about winning. Not Democracy.
So your little jabs at the Democrats ring a little hollow. Instead, why don't you look at why the Republicans haven't been advocating improvements in the voting process?
The only democratic outcome of the 2004 election is to organize new elections. If the Ukraine can do it, the US should be able to do the democratically right thing too. Of course the legal context and its current implementation is deeply flawed so that needs to be fixed as well. Three recounts and three different outcomes is unacceptable. Obviously sombody has trouble counting or someone is manipulating rather than counting the results.
It's unbelievable that two times in a row, the US gets a president whose election victory is all but certain. I'm not saying Bush didn't win. I'm just saying that it is pretty hard too establish that he won (and with how many votes) given the many legitimate (amd not so legitimate complaints) about the voting procedure, the way of counting votes, etc.
IMHO Bush should fix democracy in his own country before spreading it to the rest of the world.
Jilles
Yes, and the law is still being followed. This is where your political bias is providing for you a significant mental block. The rules, the law, is still being followed.
Mental blocks? What about your mental block? As if following existing laws to their conclusion is remotely similar to passing NEW laws for your convenience. You are fighting windmills here, Pudge.
I didn't say Diebold voting machines were used.
You implied it by mentioning it in response to a discussion about Washington, and Republicans in Washington. Diebold electronic voting systems have nothing at all to do with anything I have been talking about. You decided to change the subject of voting in Washington state to some larger pet peeve about something marginally related.
Here's the fact that you cannot seem to accept: He has been feted as a guest at President Bush's Texas ranch, joining a cadre of "Pioneers and Rangers" who have pledged to raise more than $100,000 for the Bush reelection campaign. Most memorably, O'Dell last fall penned a letter pledging his commitment "to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President."
I can't accept it? I'm the one who quoted it, after you misrepresented what was said!
Ummm, "Diebold" is a company. A company cannot say anything because it is not a person. The people who own and run the company can make statements.
Companies have official statements made on its behalf by its officers. Those are said to be statements made by the company. That is what is meant when one says a company says something, as you did. This was not one of those statements, as it was not said on behalf of the company.
Because I gave a clear example of Sam Reed blocking attempts to fix problems.
You're lying. You gave a clear example of one person saying that Reed was blocking attempts to fix an alleged problem.
Further, the initial statement was that Republicans do not trying to fix voting problems. Even if it were true that Reed was blocking attempts to fix voting problems in one case, that does not show that he is not trying to fix other voting problems.
So you have one example that does not show what you say, and cannot prove what you hope. Yay for you.