Redstate

Personally, I'd prefer Dino in the Senate.  The tone of WA at the state level would have to lean more to the right for him to really be an affective governor.  I think he would serve the state and his constiuents better in the Senate.

Now, if only we can get him to run.  IMO, Elizabeth Dole should be all over him like white on rice!

And the Democrats get away with another one.

While the judge did not rule the way I had hoped, the high profile of this case (with many thanks to Stefan Sharkansky) has shone a bright light on the level of incompetence and/or fraud present in the election machinery in King County.

Hopefully it has opened some eyes in Washington state, and hopefully they will enact reforms so that another election cannot be stolen.

How prescient does Hugh Hewitt look now, considering the title of his recent book?

   The thing is, I thought I was ready to lose- but not so overwhealmingly.  I mean, this like getting to the end of a boxing match and thinking you're probably winning on points but you know it's close.  You go to the judges for the decision and they rule that in the first round the ref counted wrong when you got knocked down and got up on the count of eight.  Instead the judges say you were down for ten and award your opponent a TKO win in the first round.

   I couldn't believe it.  The judge virtually parroted the Democratic talking points.  I know that the Dems are gonna be quoting his "no evidence" line ad nausium for the next 4 years- it'll be tommorrows headline in the newspapers.  I just can't believe it.

   As many have pointed out, the level of evidence required to contest the election makes the contest statute meaningless. Consider:

    1: To deduct illegal votes you must have the illegal voters testify how they voted.  Except the judge seems to have forgotten the 5th Amendment, which protects a person from making incriminating statements- and last time I checked voting illegally is a crime.  That's not all, what about the right to secret ballot? Do we just through that out the window?

    2: "no evidence of misconduct" by election officials?  You had election officials admit, on the stand, that they falsified the reconciliation reports upon which the election was certified.  That's not misconduct?!?

    3: Finally, and most damningly in my opinion.  The judge ruled:

      A: The reconciliation process is "the one check" on either ballot stuffing, or the removal of ballots.

      B: King County could not reconcile the number of votes with the number of voters.  That there were at least 800+ more ballots than voters.

      C: However, there is "no evidence" of ballot stuffing, despite the fact that there has never been given an reasonable alternate explination- just mysterious unspecified "errors"

      What this ruling has done, is to make it so that, as a practical matter, to contest an election, you must have either videotape or eyewitness testimony of someone stuffing ballot boxes, or removing ballots from ballot boxes.  If this is the case, why do we even bother with reconciliation?

   To top it of, the judge didn't even give King County a "stern talking to".  He found that they were "lax" and "unconcerned" with errors, but there was no editorializing about how their behavior had damaged voter confidence in the election, or admonishions demanding they improve their conduct so as to prevent this from happening in the future. To put it bluntly, the judge told the 50% of Washington State who voted for Rossi to go to hell.

had a ruling and went looking for reasons to rule that way, than actually considering the evidence.

I knew if it went to a hand recount we'd get royally filibustered.  Rossi for Senate, and when he gets his campaign together, I'll be on the donation cavalcade.  I've had enough of Washington State -- let the Olympians move to Canada, or better yet, put them on the first boat to the DPRK so they can help feed the starving masses.

Maybe we should add Rossi to this list:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1399834/posts

After all, none of us are outraged about the widespread election fraud in Ohio and Florida.  Principle must stand higher than partisanship, and election fraud should be condemned by ALL parties, not just by the party who loses.

Hello there Mr. Troll ... A trifle uncomfortable under the bridge tonight so you decided to take a stroll?

boring trolls like this are no fun

And this is it.  Be constructive or leave.  Or we'll help you out the door.

for a mish-mash of reasons pragmatic, legalistic, and idealistic, but mostly because elections have to come to an end sometime.

Legalistic: For all the evidence of fraud, you cannot, as the judge avers, prove evidence of pro-Gregroire fraud. You can infer it, mathematically suggest it, and darn well believe it happened, but proof with a capital P is not in evidence.

Pragmatic: Because any longer and Rossi looks like a poor loser.

Idealistic: Voters do indeed have the power to fix things. My suggestion: Have Rossi be a prominent supporter of a fix-the-electoral-system initiative and throw-the-bums-out drive.

I love the idea of Rossi as a Senator, but his skills and chops would better serve the cause of reforming the Washington State polity. Keep Rossi in the public's eye for two-plus years and run him again for governor.

How is this not constructive?:

Principle must stand higher than partisanship, and election fraud should be condemned by ALL parties, not just by the party who loses.

This is really for the better.  First of all, it will (and HAS) greatly increased Rossi's name recognition in the state.  It has also galvanized his supporters and, I am sure, garnered new ones.  I fully expect that Rossi will gain statewide office in some capacity in the next few years.

And, most importantly, it has set a high bar for future contests of elections.  I know it stings now, but do we really want a situation where the first thing contestents do in an election is hire a good legal team for the inevitable post-election law suit?

Because what we have seen over the past few years is that ANY election anywhere will have irregularities in it.  Even the use of electronic voting has not solved every voting irregularity.  Believe me, if we open the door to anything but absolutely solid evidence of intentional fraud or gross incompetence, we will have just birthed a new occupation--professional election contestor.

(Imagine lawyers measuring tread height on steps at polling places to see if they can claim that elderly people were disproportionately turned away at the polls; poring over font selection, colors and sizes on electronic machines to look for a basis of prejudice against seeing-impaired persons, checking they eyesight and reading skills of every poll worker to see if there is a basis to claim that people with fake ID's could get in to vote, etc., etc., etc......)

This election just highlighted the (identified) problems, which were, in total, a vanishingly small percentage of the total votes cast.  It just mattered here more than ever, since the margin of victory was a small fraction of that vanishingly small percentage.

A good way to put it.  I agree.

How long is a governor's term in WA, and will this ruling help her, hurt her, or not make a difference.

I am not convinced Washington is going to do anything to make this better, and if they can what would it be?  It appears the judge has given the cheater free reign to cheat in Washington state.  

but I believe we are stuck with Christine until 2008, at least.  I'm new to the state, but I do believe the governor serves for a four year term.  Someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

I just heard, as Matt has updated, that Dino will not continue his fight to the SC of Washington.

While I am not happy about today's ruling, I think Dino is making the right decision.  There is no need for him to spend any more political capital on this fight.

It is my hope that in about 4-6 weeks, we might see Dino Rossi emerge as a candidate for the Senate seat currently held by Maria Cantwell.  If that happens, I will change my voter registration from Texas and work like a dog to see him elected.

That quote was fine.  This quote:

After all, none of us are outraged about the widespread election fraud in Ohio and Florida.

is not.  Assumes facts not in evidence.  Yelling "fraud" loud enough and long enough doesn't make it fraud, just makes everyone tired of listening.

See Update III to this story--based on the Seattle media poll, more people thought Rossi actually got the most votes in the election, as opposed to Gregoire.  

Can't wait for Gregoire to hold a victory party and claim a mandate, based on that.

What's she going to say on the victory podium?

-"See, I TOLD you they couldn't PROVE I stole the election."

-"If at first you don't succeed, count, and count, and count again!"

-"It's not about winning or losing--it's all about who gets to count the votes."

Now, unleash the hounds of the conservative blogosphere, to nip and slash at Christine for the next three years!

Sore-loserism over 2000 hasn't helped the Democrats any that I can see. A big push on voting reform — throwing the bums out in King County, improved standards for identification, etc. — is constructive, and also serves to remind people of the election.

political skills at all, she'll continue to quietly do her work at the governor's office and breathe a quiet sigh of relief that she is still in office.

To boast about such a win would be very bad for her at this point.  

still care about this, when the next election comes around for governor?  Or will it die down to the point, that she will get reelected.

I admit being on the other coast in a teeny tiny state, that I am not tuned into Washington State politics, but the next election is almost four years away still, and that is a lot of time for this little fiasco to be forgotten.

Then why didn't anyone object to THIS post?:

the level of incompetence and/or fraud present in the election machinery in King County.

...

hopefully they will enact reforms so that another election cannot be stolen.

Blatant and unproven claims of a stolen election.  Yet it goes without comments from the rest of the gallery because this is a right-leaning site and he's referring to an election that the GOP lost.

The number of voting 'incidents' were no higher in WA than in any other state last election.  Just because the GOP has more of a spine when it comes to litigating over election fraud than the wimpy dems doesn't mean that they're the only ones subject to suffering from election fraud.

From www.verifiedvoting.org

https://voteprotect.org/index.php?display=EIRMapNation&cat=ALL&star
t_time=&start_date=&end_time=&end_date=&search=&go=Appl
y+filter

To assume that more fraud was committed in WA than in OH, FL, or any other state is quite leap of faith if you look at the 2004 election data.

To be constructive, go to the frontpage of verifiedvoting.org and see if your state is proposing (or has passed) legislation requiring physical backup of votes (like paper or tape records).  If your state isn't proposing such legislation, get on the phone to your legislators (dem or republican) and get them to work on this issue.

is that Dino runs against Maria Cantwell in 2006, for her Senate seat.  

Being a newcomer to the state, I don't know how long the memory will be, but I hope the GOP push hard enough for voter reform that it won't even be close next time.

He encouraged voters to work for change, and broadly hinted he'll be back, in some race, before long.

"Some race", my foot-- Rossi in the Senate, and we have actually benefitted from this nonsense, ironically enough.

But it's not a good ruling.  It would be, except for one thing-- he completely ignored, (as he may have had to), the fact that we were in court precisely because John F. Kerry, (who by the way served in Vietnam), funded a recount... If one side gets to recount the votes until it gets the result it wants, then this judge should have taken that into consideration-- the basis for believing that these felon votes were D was at least as strong as the basis for "needing" a recount in the first place.   He stated that the judiciary would be arrogant to "decide" this election... and he's right.  Except that it was the judiciary that already had allowed enough recounts to let C G win the stupid thing! Get it, judge?  It's a situation of wanting "to have it both ways".

Ah well.  It's great that Rossi will (hopefully) be Senator, but this is a bad precedent for future hyper-close elections where the felon vote, etc might have made the difference.  Next time we'll need evidence that puts the CSI squad to shame.

So those bazillion felon/provisional votes can't be proven to be Democrats?  Yeah, NO KIDDING-- we have a secret ballot system here, dude.  But who do you think you're kidding?

Voting reform act, Now.  Please.  And show me your ID.

any party is welcome to a single (1) hand recount as long as they pay for it up front.  If the recount overturns the official results, then the money for the recount is refunded to the party who put up the funds.

In this case, I believe the JFK (the lesser) did put up the $, but since the recount overturned the previous result, the state of Washington actually paid for the counting.

So, again, it may suck, but I believe the decision was correct and will actually be to the GOP's benefit in the long run.

(I mean, it's not like you're going to forget this any time soon, right?  Multiply that by 50% of the state's voters and I think you have a motivated voter base.)

Blatant and unproven claims of a stolen election.

It has already been established that there were more than a thousand votes than voters in King County, WA. Add that to the fact that they themselves admitted that they put in more than three hundred unconfirmed provisional ballots in with valid ballots. And again, what about the fact that the election officials kept "finding" ballots days and even weeks after election day?

Against that, we have allegations by partisan organizations like the New York Times, CBS and Jesse Jackson complaining about how all their exit polls (all in urban centers and college towns) showed that Kerry was going to win by 35%.

PS: Election officials at the precinct and county level are elected officials. They are in charge of requisitioning voting machines, ballot paper, etc. Every single area where problems exist in either Ohio or Florida do not have a single Republican election official. So if Democrats are having problems voting in those problems, it has nothing to do with the GOP.

Go back under your bridge, troll.

and I don't have any sense of how significant this will be in four years. My guess would be that if the candidate isn't Rossi, it won't be signficant at all. But that's just a general sense, not derived from any particular insight into Washington State's character.

What I find vaguely dismaying about all this is the consensus among people from other states that Rossi's true calling is in the US Senate. The un-written subtext of which is "which actually matters, unlike the Governorship of some silly little state out west".

We have to stop beating this dead horse.  Rossi has said he will not run for the Senate.  He's a good man and would do a fine job, but he is not interested in that job.  He has stated his reasons, and they are very goods ones, IMO.  Time for the B Team to step up and bring in a candidate.  It will probably be a sacrificial lamb, since Cantwell is a much stronger campaigner than Fraudoire and is in a better position to win statewide with a large margin.

I wouldn't blame Rossi if he washed his hands of the whole filthy mess and turned his back on the rotten politics of WA state.  He's a family man and had a successful life outside of politics.  Just tell the lying, cheating bums where to go.

He loses the governorship by 129 votes, in court, after the third recount, and just decides to pack it in completely because of this "whole filthy mess?"  I'm sure the Democrats in Washington State would love to see Rossi pack up his family and the children and move to Montana, and it's up to Rossi what to do next, but he very nearly gave the GOP the first Governorship of Washington State since the Reagan administration and I hope he's not as badly wounded -- even petulant! -- as you're suggesting there.

Gee, I don't know, PO, for your first comment you sound a whole lot like a Gregoire campaign worker.  What would have happened to Bill Clinton if he gave up like that?

That's all I am saying.  He has said he isn't interested in being in the Senate.  I don't understand why we keep beating this drum.

While appealing for a revote, he couldn't say "well, I want to be GOV but if that doesn't work out, maybe I'll go to the SEN."  He had to be clear that it wasn't an option.  But, of course, it is an option.

If he chooses not to run, I won't fault him.  But he now can think about it without the trial looming over him.  And I do think Sen. Dole should try her best to convince him.  If he is set on staying in WA instead of DC, well, I wouldn't blame him.  But his party could use a man like him representing WA in the Senate.

First, to non-WA residents the US Senate is probably more important than the GOV seat.  That is understandable especially when no other candidate has a real chance.

Second, that does not imply that it is because WA is some silly state out west.  I'd love to see GOV Hoeven (ND), GOV Bush (FL), GOV Douglas (VT), and GOV Heinneman (NE) run against their Democratic Sentors during this cycle as well.  And they are all in office at this point.

Third, assuming Rossi wants to stay involved in politics, he can either a) wait 4 years and run in a rematch or b) run against Cantwell next year.  It's his choice, but I do think we should encourage him to take out Cantwell.  If he chooses to stay in WA instead of moving to DC, I can't fault him.  WA is a much nicer place to be.

So Rossi loses the court case and then decides to take on a race that he said all along he had no interest in?  You don't think that would make him look a little hypocritical, maybe insincere, perhaps an opportunist, a flip-flopper?  Don't you see the danger in doing that?

I don't think Rossi is well-served by listening to anyone in the national party.  They are the ones who convinced him to take on this kamikaze ride in the first place.  And while he's fighting for his rights in court Bush and the rest of the pols in DC are feting Gregoire (Fraudoire) as the "legitimate" governor of WA state?  Nothing like twisting the knife in the back of the candidate you convinced to run.

I hope this post puts to rest the bogus assertion of my being a Gregoire campaign worker.  For the record, I don't even live in WA state.  But I have a concern for fairness and honest elections and the future of representative government.  And the theft of the WA state governor's race threatens that.

any party is welcome to a single (1) hand recount as long as they pay for it up front.

That works for the first recount, but what about the second?

..I believe the decision was correct and will actually be to the GOP's benefit in the long run.

Well I hope so, but I don't quite see it, since the message is partially, Legal or Not, as long as you can get your vote in the box, it will be counted  By rejecting the statistical arguments the GOP wanted to use, he removed the last disincentive the Dems had to bring every felon on the planet to the next race-- once the ballots are in, they're home free.

Clearly "election by litigation" with armies of arguing statisticians would not be a good thing.  Ultimately, it would be best if we could stop the "keep counting until X wins" paradigm, and the only way we can do that is to have a counting procedure which is so iron-clad and idiot proof that recounting would be irrelevant-- you would get the same exact number every time.

And someday maybe we could put a man on the moon...

I agree that there is NO WAY Dino should run for Senate.

He made a VERY big point about how he wants Governor, not Senator. He's just like every other political animal out there if he goes back on his word now.

Be patient, wait for the next statewide office (preferably governor)

I'd also be perfectly happy to see him go for King County Executive (If he lives in King County and can. I'm not sure about this)

Senator would be a sellout.

until the last line, where you reveal your lack of judgement.

In Ohio Blackwell threatened to fire election officials that didn't follow his exact orders.  What's the point of having bi-partisan election officials if they're subject to immediate recrimination by a partisan Secretary of State? It pretty much dashes to the floor any claims of 'bipartisan' election commissions.

MSNBC reported in Ohio there were 90,000 more votes cast than registered voters in just ONE county.

In Ohio there was a lockdown of a county courthouse for 'terrorism' reasons, which the FBI denies was ever under such threat.  Outside observers were unlawfully locked out of the building for several hours at a key time for counting votes.

I'm willing to view the problems in WA as serious.  I'm also willing to view the problems in every other state as serious as well.  But I guess I'm just a troll who believes that in a democracy the voters have a right to have their votes counted properly.

It weakens America to view election problems as only being bad when one side does it.

just a troll. Usually they show us enough respect to at least quote their agitprop accurately.

MSNBC reported in Ohio there were 90,000 more votes cast than registered voters in just ONE county.

But on the chance I may be wrong, which county had 90,000 more votes than registered voters and provide the MSNBC link.

I don't make stuff up.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6442857/

in Cuyahoga County, that is greater Cleveland, the official records of 29 different voting precincts show more votes than registered voters to a total of 93,000 extra votes in that county alone.  

Lots more there too:

..in the town of Gahanna outside Columbus, Ohio.  There in a district with just 800 voters, a voting machine added 3,893 votes to Mr. Bush`s total.  

Here's some more for you in FL:

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000715.html

88,000 in Palm Beach County

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/article_10500.shtml

In one voting precinct in Gahanna, Ohio, 4,258 voters supposedly cast an electronic ballot for George Bush while only 260 voted for John Kerry. While it is vaguely possible that over 94% of voters in the precinct supported George W. Bush, it is a hard number to believe considering that only 638 voters were counted at the polling center.  

The Columbus Dispatch has investigated the matter and the director of the board of elections within the county admitted that Bush only received 365 votes.  He stated that a "glitch" occurred in the electronic voting machine during the vote tally.  This glitch could have given nearly 4,000 fake votes to George Bush if it had not discovered.

Lastly, here's todays article from the Seattle Times:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002319056_webverdict06.html

Judge John Bridges today upheld the election of Gov. Christine Gregoire, dismissing a Republican lawsuit and so soundly rejecting the party's claims that Dino Rossi said he would not go forward with what had been seen as an inevitable appeal.

...

"There is no evidence that ballots were changed, the ballot box stuffed or that lawful votes were removed from either candidate's ballot box," Bridges said.

...

In a ruling that took nearly one hour to read, Bridges said he saw no evidence of fraud and rejected Republicans' proposed method for apportioning illegal votes. And he went further, saying Gregoire would have won even if he had applied the Republican theory of subtracting illegal votes from each candidate.

...

"I think it was a resounding rejection of every one of the Republican claims," said Democratic attorney Jenny Durkan.

"They chose the county, they chose the court, they chose the method of proof," meaning the proportional deduction analysis.

"There is no corner for them to run to in that decision."

On the Republicans' fraud charge, the judge repeated the fact that there was no official fraud claim in the case, but then said that in any case, he saw no evidence of fraud.

...

Bridges did not apportion the vast majority of illegal votes to any candidate. The only votes he did subtract from any candidate were five that had been proven by Democrats, through depositions taken from the voters themselves. Of those five, four had voted for Rossi and one for Libertarian Ruth Bennett.

...

There is no evidence that the problems in King County had anything to do with "intentional misconduct or someone's desire to manipulate the election" or "partisan bias," the phrase Republicans used to allege wrongdoing.

"There is no evidence before the court to question ballot security as to those ballots actually counted," Bridges said, knocking down another Republican claim about King County.

...

Secretary of State Sam Reed, who had been critical of some of the claims of vote fraud made by his fellow Republicans, said he hopes Bridge's ruling, which he called "forthright, practical and clear," will help rebuild voter confidence.

...

Reed criticized the Republican efforts to claim vote fraud without producing convincing evidence.

"I think if they were going to allege fraud, they should have done it in the initial filings of the case and I think they should have had proof of fraud, and obviously they didn't do that."

It would behoove you all as american citizens to stop name calling and actually look at the very real issue of election fraud in this country.  You've got a good start with the WA fiasco.  Now think nationally.  Its a simple extension of the same thoughts, really.

Why would Blackwell, a Republican, either engage in or allow massive potential fraud in a Democrat-filled stinkhole like that?

Gahanna, which is a little town about 7 miles from me, had a software glitch that was fixed.  The final reconciliation fixed that.  There was no ballot stuffing or "found votes" at the last minute that put a candidate that was behind into the lead.

Fact is, Bush won Ohio because of back-breaking work at the grassroots level by honest people who GOTV in the rural and suburban areas where Republicans have run strongly in the past.  Even with that, Kerry in '04 did better than Gore in '00, a warning that should be well-heeded by national party leaders.

Its over:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/227412_rossi07.html

Rossi ends the fight

Judge upholds Gregoire's election victory

By GORDY HOLT AND CHRIS McGANN

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS

The 2004 governor's race is finally over.

Republican Dino Rossi said yesterday he would not appeal a Chelan County judge's decision that upheld Gov. Christine Gregoire's slim victory, acknowledging that after Judge John Bridges rejected all of the GOP arguments, he had little chance of prevailing.

Rossi said he hoped his challenge will ultimately bring change to the election processes of King County and the state, and he urged his supporters not to lose heart.

"Don't give up. Stay involved," he said. "If there is a problem, we need to fix it."

Something that everyone needs to work on everywhere in the USA.

He updated the main post.  And other commenters already mentioned it.  Did you read the story and/or thread?

The sun is reflecting off of it right into my eyes.

You, uh, might want to check some news sources occasionally - that voting machine glitch has been known about virtually since election day, and Franklin county officials have admitted the error, and corrected Bush's vote total in Gahanna to 365.

And you might want to also read the update to the Washington Dispatch story, where Palm Beach County corrected the original report, and discovered an additional 91,000+ ballots.

so I'm posting the link.

No, I didn't RE-read the original story.  Now that I have done so upon your oh-so-constructive post, I see no link, so therefore my post above is still a constructive and relevant to the topic.

You guys might want to start taking some Prozac.  You're all so cranky.  At least I'm not posting in all-bold "GET OVER IT" which has been done so often in regard to dem losses.  I actually happen to take election fraud as a serious topic, and not just political games.

The lockdown that was accomplished under Homeland Security, which the FBI denies having anything to do with?  Can I continue to wear my hat for that - especially when Dem party election officials were barred from the building?

Link

Everyone in this thread has a tinfoil hat on as I look around (possibly with the exception of yourself - or do you think Rossi got 'cheated'?).  Yet it is all without real supporting evidence that stood up in a court of law:

"There is no evidence that ballots were changed, the ballot box stuffed or that lawful votes were removed from either candidate's ballot box," Bridges said.

...

In a ruling that took nearly one hour to read, Bridges said he saw no evidence of fraud

and remember:

"They (the Rossi team) chose the county, they chose the court, they chose the method of proof,"

I am aware of problems being found and 'explained away', sometimes with valid reasons and sometimes without valid reasons.  The fact that any question remains in ANY election means that the system needs to be changed to be fair, transparent, and with iron-clad physical backup.  Paperless/backupless machines, machines that count backwards, give negative votes, have 'glitches' are all signs of problems.  And problems should immediately and thoroughly be investigated to see if they are legitimate or are actually evidence of fraud.

wearing a tinfoil hat over the governorship of Washington State. I'd frankly rather that Rossi ran for the Senate. I proudly wear it for other causes, but that's another discussion for another time.

Now, I'll agree that the lockdown smells a little hinky from a PR standpoint nonetheless, but I think that as long as counsel from both parties were allowed to be present, it passes the smell test for me. And this is where the article you linked to indicates a pretty serious twisting of facts:

"I was denied admission myself," said Jeff Ruppert, the Warren County counsel for the Kerry-Edwards campaign. "I had to present credentials."

Now, the first half of that sentence leads you to believe that Ruppert was actually not allowed in the building. But, the discerning reader will notice that all he was actually saying was that they made the guy show some ID. You wanna throw a hissy because they made the guy show ID before entering a location where ballots were being counted? I'd frankly break out a tinfoil hat of my very own if they weren't making people show credentials! Suffice to say that Ruppert's statement was crafted in such a way as to be deliberately disingenuous.

There's nothing in election law in Ohio that requires that the press be given access. The fact that county officials decided not to was probably an error in judgment, because it's led to this subsequent carping. Does it mean that election fraud occurred? Frankly, I'm not buying it.

as much as the next guy. But you, champ, are a rank amateur. While you might not make things up you certainly rely upon people who do for your sources.

Explain how Palm Beach County's http://election.dos.state.fl.us/elections/resultsarchive/Index.asp?Election
Date=11/2/04&DATAMODE=<voter turnout</a> was 75% if 88,000 more votes than registered voters were cast?

Explain how any county in Ohio had highest turnout by any county with more than 100,000 registered voters was 77.75%. Turn out in Cuyahoga County was 68.33%: 1,00588-07 Kerry, 687,255 Bush.

Consider this to be your warning that this type of crap crosses the line.

that if Keith Olbermann poked his head in the door at RedState, he'd instantly be troll rated.

Which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone - least of all Keith Olbermann.

was a machine recount and was automatically triggered by law by the small differential between the two candidates.

The Ruppert individual admits he was able to go anywhere he needed to that night.  However, he also admits:

Ruppert, who says he doesn't believe the election was stolen, agrees that evidence or proof of electronically hacking the vote is beyond either the reach of an election observer like himself or even the looming recount. A recount of the votes would not show any trace of tampering with the computer program. If electronic strings were being pulled, Ruppert said, "we wouldn't be able to see it."

In other words, it is completely beyond his control to see if the election really was stolen.  That's not good for democracy.  And its true of ANY election official the way that votes are electronically counted now.

"There are two available hypotheses," Freeman (prof of Statistics) says. "Either the exit polls were really systematically skewed--and there is no evidence of that--or the vote count was off. I haven't produced any evidence of that, but a lot of people have. And the people who are in a position to say the exit polls were right--the people with the information--are not speaking."

There's lots of PR issues as you put it.  First the lockdown.  Then the fact that Jeb is George's brother.  Then the exit polls all being wrong in the wrong direction (yet were OK in the Ukraine). The head of Diebold donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the republicans, knows George personally, and pledged to give Ohio to bush.  There are ties at the top between ES&S and Diebold (Urosevich brothers).  ES&S has ties to fundamentalist Christian groups (founded by  Howard Ahmanson of the 'evolution is just a theory' idea).   Its all 'circumstantial' evidence, but at some point 'circumstantial' evidence becomes overwhelming evidence.

There were FBI reports - found on Diebold's hacked machines after the 2000 election - which showed Gore getting negative votes in counties.  What kind of an election machine gives negative votes?

Anyway it goes on and on.  The real solution is to make elections bulletproof so that EVERYONE can believe they are fair.

I'm coming down with a fever right now, so I don't have the mental capacity to respond to all of this post. I wish I had a way to bookmark it and come back later to it. But I did want to point out that this statement:

"Either the exit polls were really systematically skewed--and there is no evidence of that

Is patently false. I can only surmise that you didn't watch election coverage the night of the actual election, or have forgotten that exit polling gave Kerry an 18 point victory in Pennsylvania, and had him virtually tied in Mississippi, and winning Virginia. In fact, one of the biggest stories of election night was how systematically skewed the exit polls really were towards Kerry.

Now, you and I are not really as far apart on this issue as you might think. I'm in favor of significant election reform - the most pressing need being the verification of identity of voters. But the fact remains that with current technology, when 100+ million people vote (AND have their votes counted) in the same day, there are going to discrepancies along the way. That's just life. And neither electronic nor paper voting can completely eliminate that.

"They are the ones who convinced him to take on this kamikaze ride in the first place."

Who?  He fought this of his own accord and he obviously really wants to be GOV.  And yes it would be insincere and opportunistic to now run for SEN.  He wouldn't be the first nor last politician to take an opporunity nor change his mind.  The script goes like this:

"Now that I have had some time since the GOV election, I have decided that I still want to serve the state of WA.  Since Ms. Gregoire is going a fine job as GOV, I would like to serve as your SEN in Washington.  I would like to work for electoral reform in WA and around the country so that no one must go through what our state went through this past year.  blah, blah, blah"  Hire a speech writer and fix it up a little.

is from Eastern WA and he served as a state Senator before running for GOV.  Serving your state as a SEN is the same profession as serving as GOV: politician.  And most voters know that politicians aren't that discerning.  Polls already show him leading Cantwell, 50%-41%.  Even if he lost some sympathy, he could still win.  People like him, which office isn't as important.

Since you're so easily able to check and understand that official and final election results don't show impossible things (like turnout above 100%), then you have a chance to understand the real discrepancies that are less obvious, but which statisticians have shown are very real:

Right here.

Unprecedented discrepancies between exit poll results and final tallies in several key states occurred that still have never been explained.  It has only recently been officially confirmed (by the exit pollsters themselves) that on election night the final set of exit polls showed John Kerry defeating George Bush by 3% of the popular vote and a clear majority of 316 electoral votes.  Our statisticians analyzed Edison/Mitofsky's own explanation of their exit poll discrepancies, and found serious flaws in their argument.  Exit polls have been used for years to detect corruption of official vote tallies - most recently in Ukraine.  

that the exit polls are actually widely misused in this country. They are not intended to forecast the winners of elections, nor ever have been. Their sole usefulness (which is seriously in doubt in any case) is in telling us why people voted as they did. Exit polling companies have been warning us for years not to use their data to forecast winners, and it seems we're just now getting the message.

When you have exit polls that show Kerry winning PA by 18 points, tying in Mississippi, and winning Virginia by 10, you know they're just frankly not very reliable for that purpose.

And it's especially erroneous to charge corruption based on a five point differential, which is well within the statistical margin of error on virtually any poll that is not, in fact, the real thing.  

First, MachoNacho thanks for your well-thought replies to my posts.  I appreciate your logic and comments which don't revolve around attacking the messenger and are also rational.

Exit polling is used around the world to verify the integrity of voting outside of the USA (by the US Government itself).  Why is it not valid to use the same strategy to verify the integrity of voting within the US?

------------------------------------

Second of all, I am finally able to read the posting guidelines to this site (it was coming up blank on my other computer which is very antiquated).  I see that although the first posting guideline sounds fair and reasonable and that everyone of any opinion is welcome here provided they maintain good manners, I see the 'update' to the guidelines that this is only a conservative and even specifically Republican website.  While I obviously inferred that it leaned to the right from the URL (redstate), I didn't realize it was mandatory policy.

I strive to posting information which is sourced from reputable sources, and which makes people think and at a minimum check their facts.  I'm not a democrat, nor a liberal, but neither am I a republican.  Typically I vote 3rd party, although I tend to align myself with 'conventional' conservatism:  smaller government, states rights, and fiscally conservative.  I guess you could call me socially liberal, or perhaps just libertarian.

Election fraud, or the potential for it is a very sensitive subject for me, because its such a sensitive subject for all of america.  Maybe that got me started off on the wrong foot by posting in this thread first, but on the other hand its what inspired me to register to the site.

Anyway I will try to maintain a non-disruptive presence now that I am able to view the rules and see the republican-specific nature of the site.  However, I would like to acknowledge that I will often play 'devils advocate' as doing so is how I arrive at my own conclusions.  In other words, if everyone simply agrees to something at face value it doesn't lead to much useful information being uncovered.  Only by attempting to refute opposing information can an argument be truly tested and/or strengthened.  Of course I will adhere to doing so in a constructive manner as opposed to a combative and disruptive manner.  Is that fair?  Or am I wasting my time here?

that a differential of 5 points is well within the standard +- margin of error of 3 points that even extraordinarly thorough polls are subject to. If we saw something on the order of a 10 or 15 point differential, you'd have a much stronger case, although you'd be hard pressed to prove the point that election officials nationwide systematically skewed the vote in one direction. That's a benefit of having the state legislatures control national elections, it's a built in legitimacy feature. Fraud in a single locality is fairly easy to buy. Fraud in 50 separate and independent localities, all trending in the same direction is so implausible that it borders on impossible.

You can play the devil's advocate here, and that's fine. We've got a very fine "loyal opposition" around here that makes the site better. But making a claim that Cuyahoga county experienced a voter turnout of over 100% is frankly patently absurd and I can understand streiff's ire. Especially given that in the era of modern elections, election data is conveniently posted on the internet for everyone to see, as streiff demonstrated. Perhaps the valuable lesson here for everyone involved is that Keith Olbermann doesn't really count as a "reputable source" to anyone who isn't a regular at dKos.

On a personal note, I'm continually amazed to locate people who claim to have "seen" something on his program, when the ratings clearly indicate that no one but Olbermann's immediate family is actually watching Countdown at any given point in time.

I like c17wife.  She always says what I want to say before I get around to saying it.

Keep on truckin'.

Every single one of his arguments got shot down.  So here we are debating whether or not Bush won last year instead of discussing what the topic of the diary is.

Look, clown, go back to dkos and bounce your inane ideas off of other morons.

We cannot be reduced to discussing whether or not Bush won last year.  It is simply beyond question.

Now the topic of the diary is Dino Rossi.  In my opinion, this guy got robbed.  A judge was afraid to overturn the results of a recount even while admitting that at least 1600+ illegal votes were cast.

And Rossi's people, rightly or wrongly, did not even research how many noncitizens voted in the election.  So Gregoire stole the election.  The only good that can come out of this is if states like Wisconsin, Florida, and Ohio begin to demand picture ID to vote AND demand some type of proof of citizenship to register to vote.  You have to show proof of citizenship to work, why are people allowed to register to vote without showing proof of citizenship?

We've got to purge more cheaters out of the system.  The fact that at least 1600 illegal votes were cast in Washington alone is disgusting.  Imagine how many illegal votes would turn up in Ohio if they looked at people voting under multiple names, felons voting, etc.

It is just disgusting.  I don't mind getting beat fair and square, but I'm sick and tired of letting cheaters like the Washington Democrats steal elections.

Can someone ban this reddeststate clown?

He's throwing around lies and trying to lead us off on a wild goose chase to prove (as if there was any question) that Kerry lost last year.

Kerry lost, you punk, get over it.

Krempansky, Doverspa, Streiff, someone?

not who.

Also, it is pretty easy to skew an exit poll.

Just put your pollsters in heavily democratic or GOP areas, and you immediately will have a skew to that party.  Exit pollsters do not stake out every polling place during an election, unless it is NH during primary season.

Also, the pollsters at our ward changed the sampling method in the middle of the day (up until around noonish she took anyone leaving the polls and willig to vote, after that they started doing every 5th person leaving).

You can get lots of good information from exit polls on the why's, but it is pretty stupid to use exit polls on the who's.

I've tried to explain that to people who think the exit polls indicate a conspiracy, and I've tried to explain it quite recently to some conservative friends who think the last election indicate the worthlessness of exit polls.

If news organizations weren't using the exit polls to figure the winner, the intergrity of the exit polls wouldn't be in question.

They are designed to find different information. We already have an accurate poll to determine who is winning, it's called the vote.

that he doesn't want to run for Senate.  I take him at his word.  If he went back on his word, it would be disappointing as I believe he is an honest person and says what he means.

Let's go over this one last time.  Rossi has publically stated two main reasons why he doesn't want to go to DC.  First, he has young children in school.  If you have kids in school (as I do), you will know that it is a hard thing to consider uprooting them from friends and familiar surroundings and drag them off to a new place, especially a cesspool like DC.  Rossi is a family man wants wants to have a presence in his family life.  Your children are only young once, and again if you have kids you will know how much this means, to the children and the parents.  Being away most of the time, 3000 miles across the country, is not a way to have a presence in your kids' lives.

Second, Rossi has said he wants to help his state.  The Demorats have run things in Olympia for 20 years and the state is foundering in red ink and economic stagnation.  As a businessman (not a politician), Rossi understands this.  He also knows that the way to change things in your state is to be in charge of the state government.  Junior Senators, 3000 miles away in DC, dealing with arcane national issues and being buried in obscurity, don't get to set state budget priorities, choose heads of departments and agencies, or work with the state legislature on legislative proposals.

These two things make Rossi an impressive candidate, to me, anyway.  They show that he has his priorities straight and a vision for where he wants to go in governing the state.  If he went back on these, his stature as a candidate would be diminished.

There are two other reasons I think Rossi may have for not wanting to run for Senate which he hasn't stated, but I think may be in the back of his mind.  First, running against CantDoWell would be a long shot.  Sure, a few push polls here and there may show him leading now, but when crunch time comes I think the WA state Dems who were reluctant to support Fraudoire will return to the fold for Cantwell.  Why?  Well, Fraudoire was a terrible campaigner.  There was no excitment for this candidate.  Rossi was able to run an effective message of "change" in making things different in Olympia.  He won't be able to sell the "change" message for change in DC in a Senate race, because his party is in control there.  Change to what?  Cantwell is a much more attractive candidate for a statewide national office than Fraudoire was for Governor.  Cantwell won't make the same mistakes Fraudoire did.

The second unstated reason is I think Rossi would consider running for Senate a second-rate consolation prize.  Consolation prizes are for losers, and Rossi is not a loser.  He won the governorship legitimately and it was stolen from him by fraud.  There are those who say, Rossi, move on, be content with a "close loss", a "moral victory", be happy to take the crumbs of a two-bit consolation prize.  But by so doing, you legitimize the fraud that robbed you of your rightful office.

Within the margin of error are of course not easily refuted.  Of course, that also doesn't mean that results are not actually being changed within that margin of error either.  In a close election (which certainly this last election was), that means that the potential for fraud is at its greatest - not only is it easier to accomplish, its harder to trace.  Of course, the burden of proof lies with the losing team to PROVE fraud if they really think it existed.  However, everyone (winners or losers) should make a concerted effort to understand the topic and security holes and work honestly and diligently to fix them.

At the invite of Leon County FL officials, a team recently tested their election security procedures.  The team found that they could hack the touch-screen voting machines easily - and the altered results were completely untraceable.  And this was AFTER Leon County thought they had sealed things up really tight.

link

Regardless of what you think of BBV (don't know how they're viewed at redstate.org), they are performing a service vital to democracy, and that is to actively test and question the integrity of our voting systems.  Whether you like them or not, they have shown many weaknesses and fallabilities of modern election methods, primarily the ease of which central tally machines and even individual touch-screen voting machines can be manipulated.  This age of widespread electronics makes counting much easier than ever before historically, but when included with networking improvements in the past 5 years, it also makes the potential for elections to be altered by only a handful of people sitting in their living rooms.  

To change the results of an election, not every machine in every precinct in every state has to be manipulated.  Manipulation of only a few precincts in a few dozen counties in a few states on election night could have resulted in an entirely different result. (once again not saying this DID happen, only that it was well within the POSSIBILITY of happening).

Every american should be concerned by the potential for election fraud whether they believe it actually happened or not.  History proves that unscrupulous people will seize upon every weakness of a system to gain power.

Link To Story

This is a story, if you believe it, that notes the involvement of prominent national figures in recruiting Rossi to run for Governor.  I am disappointed that Bush was wining and dining Fraudoire in DC and giving her honor as the "legitimate" governor of WA state while the guy he recruited to run was fighting for his rights.

I know Dino Rossi made the decision to run this race of his own accord.  But I have no doubts that he was encouraged to run for it by those higher up in the party.  If they are going to do that, it seems to me the least they can do is stand by you when you're opposing blatant, in-your-face election theft.