Kerry criticizes election outcome

[Laura]

Too bad you don't appear to be following it too closely. I love how disinformation gets out. I've been involved in this since before the election. If anyone really wants to know whats going on, don't depend on flkhou to tell you.

So we should listen to you? Riiiiight.

If you post some facts, maybe you won't look as silly as you do on this thread.

 

[Charade]

If you post some facts, maybe you won't look as silly as you do on this thread.

Cuts both ways sister.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Um... I got that. But that was after the 3rd recount.

I asked how is it statistically possible for it to be so close with so many people voting?

Okay--flip side...how is it impossible?

An election is not statistics--exit polls and media polls are statistics...an election is an actual accounting of the ballots on Election Day. It is not a statistical sampling--it is actual results.

Obviously the odds of this happening are 1 in 50 for each election (in terms of states...I am not about to attempt a math problem to figure out the true odds).

 

[dmadman43]

dmadman

I hope that you heard that the judge in the Washingon Governor election case denied the GOP's motion for expedited discovery. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24878-2005Jan20.html There is a hearing on Feb. 4 on the Democrats motion to dismiss. By the time this case gets through the courts, Christine Gregoire will be running for re-election.

No problem By Feb. 4th the GOP will be in a better position to have discovered more felons,double voters, and dead voters. It would be
advantageous for these categories to exceed the margin of victory before considering provisionals fed directly into the machines, military
disenfrachisement, unaccounted for ballots, etc. Or it could mean the counties have more time to hide stuff. Either way, the courts decided not to rush to judgement, which has to upset the Dems.

 

[dmadman43]

So we should listen to you? Riiiiight.

If you post some facts, maybe you won't look as silly as you do on this thread.

Be happy to. What facts would you like me to post?

 

[Laura]

Be happy to. What facts would you like me to post?

I'm sure you can find some on all those blogs you visit.

 

[Charade]

Okay--flip side...how is it impossible?

Ask 3 million people which color, red or blue (not the policital red or blue) they like better. I highly doubt the difference will be 129.

 

[Laura]

Cuts both ways sister.

Oh, I'm just here to make snide comments, like you.

 

[Charade]

Oh, I'm just here to make snide comments, like you.

Actually, I'm here provide rational insight with a little snide comments and sarcasm on the side.

 

[dcentity2000]

This is close to violation of my own abstain from political debates.

But instead of joining the debate, I'll simply reiterate a common sense.

Opposition parties tend to oppose.

That is all.



Rich::

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Ask 3 million people which color, red or blue (not the policital red or blue) they like better. I highly doubt the difference will be 129.

That is about the silliest statement that I have heard all day--thanks for the laugh.

So I see--picking the president and picking your favorite color are the same in your world.

Newsflash--They weren't picking their favorite color, they were choosing who they wanted to be president. And it is VERY clear that are country was very divided on that choice--so I'd say that the odds were pretty darn good that some place somewhere in this country was going to have a really close race.

Mel Martinez had a very narrow margin of vicotry as well over Betty Castor in Florida this year. She gracefully decided not to contest the result and ask for a recount (it didn't meet the criterion for an automatic recount).

And obviously there is a CHANCE that something will happen which is why the guidelines for Elections in the different counties have a criterion for when to do a recount.

 

[WWTBAMFAN]

Too bad you don't appear to be following it too closely. I love how disinformation gets out. I've been involved in this since before the election....

Just like most things that you purport to be following or claim to understand, you are again wrong. There is a movement by some GOP nut cases (are they friends of yours???) to recall Sam Reed. Since you appear to be unaware of the facts, here is an article about the recall effort. See
http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20050120/topstories/72345.shtml

Activists angry about how the governor's race was handled have filed a new petition seeking to recall Secretary of State Sam Reed.

I understand that there are severe problems with the recall concept but the GOP nut jobs in Washington State seem to have problems with understanding the law. Maybe you need to get some good lawyers to work for the Washington GOP.

As to the lawsuit filled by Rossi, your state constitution evidently states that only the state legislature can decide issues relating to the election of the governor. If this the case, you can conduct discovery until the you are blue in the face or until you finally do get a pony and it will not matter. The court will have no jurisdition. As it now appears, this case may still be going when your Governor is up for re-election.

Again, I am glad to educate you about what is going on in your state.

 

[dmadman43]

For the Washington state recount, wasn't it a Republican official who certified the results?

The Sec of State is a non-partisan office. There was no reason he had for not certifying as there was no blatant case of fraud. The GOP is not claiming fraud in this election.

 

[dmadman43]

Just like most things that you purport to be following or claim to understand, you are again wrong. There is a movement by some GOP nut cases (are they friends of yours???) to recall Sam Reed. Since you appear to be unaware of the facts, here is an article about the recall effort. See
http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20050120/topstories/72345.shtml I understand that there are severe problems with the recall concept but the GOP in Washington State seem to have problems with understanding the law. Maybe you need to get some good lawyers to work for the Washington GOP.

As to the lawsuit filled by Rossi, your state constitution evidently states that only the state legislature can decide issues relating to the election of the governor. If this the case, you can conduct discovery until the you are blue in the face or until you finally do get a pony and it will not matter. The court will have no jurisdition. As it now appears, this case may still be going when your Governor is up for re-election.

Again, I am glad to educate you about what is going on in your state.

Yawn. You're clueless, as always. But entertaining nonetheless. Try to refrain from getting your news from the MSM. The GOP is not behind getting Reed recalled. You're an idiot if you believe that.

 

[dmadman43]

I'm sure you can find some on all those blogs you visit.

Do you want facts or not? I'm actually working on the campaign and have been since he announced. But, if you want to continue to look foolish, be my guest.

 

[WWTBAMFAN]

Yawn. You're clueless, as always. But entertaining nonetheless. Try to refrain from getting your news from the MSM. The GOP is not behind getting Reed recalled. You're an idiot if you believe that.

As is normal your reading comprehension leaves a great deal to be desired. I never said that the Washington republican party was behind the recall. I merely stated the GOP nutcases and GOP thugs (I guess that you are telling us that GOP thugs is the unoffical name for the Washington GOP) are trying to recall Sam Reed for doing his job.

I do note that your freeper buddies on the free republic are behind the recall of Sam Reed in a big way. See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1320084/posts

As for the GOP, I saw mention that the party may be planning to run a conservative against Reed in the next primary. They are mad at Reed for doing his job.

 

[Island_Lauri]

The Sec of State is a non-partisan office. There was no reason he had for not certifying as there was no blatant case of fraud. The GOP is not claiming fraud in this election.

Is that a "fact" for Washington State or all SOS? With SOS Blackwell, also the Chairman of Bush's Reelection Campaign in Ohio, he went as far as to boast in his own fundraising letter of helping “deliver” Ohio for President Bush and said he was “truly pleased” to announce Bush had won Ohio even before all of the state’s votes had been counted.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Is that a "fact" for Washington State or all SOS? With SOS Blackwell, also the Chairman of Bush's Reelection Campaign in Ohio, he went as far as to boast in his own fundraising letter of helping “deliver” Ohio for President Bush and said he was “truly pleased” to announce Bush had won Ohio even before all of the state’s votes had been counted.

I that SOS or whatever officials responsible for tallying the vote should refrain from such partisan comments.

It would be lovely if all of them just do their jobs. If Blackwell did and said this (not saying you made it up--just sucky internet connection prevents me from being able to confirm the information)--that is just WRONG.

Edited to add--I know in Florida it's a "non-partisan" position--but that position is filled by the Governor who is party affiliated--and more often than not partisan politics govern the nominations for those types of positions. At least here it is that way.

 

[KarenC]

Edited to add--I know in Florida it's a "non-partisan" position--but that position is filled by the Governor who is party affiliated--and more often than not partisan politics govern the nominations for those types of positions. At least here it is that way.

In 2000, Katherine Harris was the Secretary of State and chairman of Bush's Florida campaign committee, just like Blackwell was in Ohio. (I don't know what the situation was with the Secretary of State in Washington and I'm too lazy to search.) I think the people who certify the vote shouldn't be active in the campaign of either candidate.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

In 2000, Katherine Harris was the Secretary of State and chairman of Bush's Florida campaign committee, just like Blackwell was in Ohio. (I don't know what the situation was with the Secretary of State in Washington and I'm too lazy to search.) I think the people who certify the vote shouldn't be active in the campaign of either candidate.

I know--and I agree!

Unfortunately they will be a party member (usually) of the same party as governor.

I don't have a problem with someone helping campaign for someone--but once they open the polls for early/absentee voting--they need to keep their mouths closed until afterwards b/c it just opens wide the possibility of an opposing party crying foul--especially in an election with a small margin of victory.

If the system did have integrity--people wouldn't be crying foul over declared victories by just a few votes.