Kerry criticizes election outcome

[Island_Lauri]

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.

See the actual letter for yourself:

The letter is 5 pages long. You can view it at:
http://rawstory.rawprint.com/105/blackwell_campaign_letter_105.php

You may also be interested to know that it has been requested that charges be brought against SOS Blackwell for:

1) Violation of Ohio state law by asking for illegal corporate contributions in a recent fundraising letter for his gubernatorial bid and

2) Violation of Federal Rule of Law - Title 18 of the U.S. Code, as revised in January 1971, prohibits use of the likeness of the Great Seal or any facsimile in “any advertisement, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production” for the purpose of conveying a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the U.S. Government under threat of a fine of not more than $250 or imprisonment of not more than 6 months, or both.

 

[BuckNaked]

While I don't think the letter should have been written on official letterhead, I don't see anything suspicious in what was said. He campaigned for the President, so of course he helped deliver the state for Bush.


Sounds like more :space: to me.

 

[dmadman43]

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.

Not sure. While the SOS may be affiliated with a party, the office itself is essentially a non-partisan office, given its role. Reed is a Republican, but that's really irrelevant to his duties as SOS.

I agree that SOS's should not be involved in partisan politics while serving.

 

[dmadman43]

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.

I'll ignore the childish name-calling. How old are you? The fact that there are some that may be calling for the SOSs job is really irrelevant to any argument regarding the current lawsuit over the election. I have no problem with how Reed handled the certification. He followed the law, which is all anyone can ask. Now the GOP is following the Constiitution in filing a suit for a re-vote. I can't believe you don't understand that concept.

I do not frequent nor have I ever visited the freerepublic site. Nice try, though. Are you trying to look foolish deliberately?

 

[dopeyone]

Waaaaaaah!

 

[Laura]

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.

Davy, Davy, Davy, it's you who looks foolish. But you're really being quite entertaining while you do so.

 

[BuckNaked]

Davy, Davy, Davy, it's you who looks foolish. But you're really being quite entertaining while you do so.

He's being foolish by explaining from first hand experience what is really happening, yet someone that is posting blogs from DU clones is not being foolish?

 

[dmadman43]

Davy, Davy, Davy, it's you who looks foolish. But you're really being quite entertaining while you do so.

I see you've not answered my question. I asked what facts you would like to know. You chose to respond by attempting to insult me. Typical.

 

[Laura]

I see you've not answered my question. I asked what facts you would like to know. You chose to respond by attempting to insult me. Typical.

Well, you've been claiming that WWTBAMFAN is soooooo misinformed about the Washington gubenatorial election, why not show us how?

And I'm not trying to insult you, just letting you know that you're making yourself look silly by not giving us facts. I guess when you don't have any facts, you just resort to "firsthand" info. How can we believe what you say? We can't.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

See the actual letter for yourself:

The letter is 5 pages long. You can view it at:
http://rawstory.rawprint.com/105/blackwell_campaign_letter_105.php

You may also be interested to know that it has been requested that charges be brought against SOS Blackwell for:

1) Violation of Ohio state law by asking for illegal corporate contributions in a recent fundraising letter for his gubernatorial bid and

2) Violation of Federal Rule of Law - Title 18 of the U.S. Code, as revised in January 1971, prohibits use of the likeness of the Great Seal or any facsimile in “any advertisement, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production” for the purpose of conveying a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the U.S. Government under threat of a fine of not more than $250 or imprisonment of not more than 6 months, or both.

I'm on your side with this one---this was a completely inappropriate of him to do. The position is non-partisan meaning not voted on nor elected. Anybody can be placed in it.

What he did is completely stupid and inappropriate. And he should have charges brought against him if he was in violation of law. What I do not have a problem with is them doing something of this nature privately.

In Florida they are very particular--and when Jeb sends out his solicitations for the public to vote the Repub ticket--it clearly is indicated on all correspondance that no tax dollars were used for preparing and mailing the correspondance (I think it indicates "paid for by the republican party" or something to that effect).

 

[dmadman43]

Well, you've been claiming that WWTBAMFAN is soooooo misinformed about the Washington gubenatorial election, why not show us how?

And I'm not trying to insult you, just letting you know that you're making yourself look silly by not giving us facts. I guess when you don't have any facts, you just resort to "firsthand" info. How can we believe what you say? We can't.

fklhou gets his "information" from the MSM. Again, tell what you would like to know. There are a ton of facts I'd be happy to present, that can be corroborated. But, I'd prefer to present them in some sort of context. So, tell me what you want to know, relative to the election.

As for his posting a random article about some random folks that are calling for the SOS's resignations, I've already said the Rossi campaign is not behind that. That's easily verified, too. Fklhou simply chose not to try to get both sides of the story.

The campaing will willingly conceded there were questionable votes cast for Rossi. But that's the whole point of the lawsuit. There were so many errors in the counting, for both parties, that it calls into question the validity of the election. The WA Consitituion allows for an election challenge and a re-vote----AFTER CERTIFICATION, if there is ample evidence to suggest.

The countly election database was made available to both parties, and we have analysis on the data and found .

When Gregoire was behind in the second recount by 42 votes, she said "'I've said all along, 42 votes out of 2.9 million is literally a tie". (that quote is easily found) Curiously, when she is ahead by 129 out of 2.9MM it's NOT a tie? I'd like to know what the magic number is that makes it not a tie.

The King County vote count data is publically available... http://www.metrokc.gov/elections/results.htm.

Our team spent days poring over the data. In the first recount 266 ballots somehow disappeared, in the second---hand recount 325 mysteriously show up. These are actual ballots not reinterpretations of votes. Of these Gregoire netted 47 and Rossi 12. In the precincts where the ballot count didn't change, but the candidates counts did by reinterpreting the votes (under and over) Rossi gained +23 and lost -27; Gregoire gained +47 and lost -36. Out of the votes reawarded to a candidate, Gregoire won 68%-- significantly more than her 59% share of the vote in King County overall. Of the candidate votes that were reinterpreted Gregoire lost only 58%.

In the precincts that discovered new ballots, but didn't change the number of under/overvotes, Gregoire won 131 (69%) of the 200 newly added ballots. In the precincts where ballots vanished, but the number of under/overvotes did not change, Gregoire lost 108 (58%) of the disappeared ballots.

In summary it seems that when ballots disappeared, they disappeared proportionally from both candidates, but when ballots appeared, they appeared disproportionally for Gregoire.

There are even more questions regarding the validity of votes in King and Snohomish Counties.

Again, the Rossi campaign is not alledging fraud specifically. The Revised Code of Washington list numerous reasons for an election to be challenged

RCW 29A.68.020
Commencement by registered voter -- Causes for.
Any registered voter may contest the right of any person declared elected to an office to be issued a certificate of election for any of the following causes:

(1) For misconduct on the part of any member of any precinct election board involved therein;

(2) Because the person whose right is being contested was not at the time the person was declared elected eligible to that office;

(3) Because the person whose right is being contested was previous to the election convicted of a felony by a court of competent jurisdiction, the conviction not having been reversed nor the person's civil rights restored after the conviction;

(4) Because the person whose right is being contested gave a bribe or reward to a voter or to an inspector or judge of election for the purpose of procuring the election, or offered to do so;

(5) On account of illegal votes.

(a) Illegal votes include but are not limited to the following:

(i) More than one vote cast by a single voter;

(ii) A vote cast by a person disqualified under Article VI, section 3 of the state Constitution.

(b) Illegal votes do not include votes cast by improperly registered voters who were not properly challenged under RCW 29A.08.810 and 29A.08.820.

For those sincerely interested, I'm happy to provide more details.

 

[Island_Lauri]

Well, I see you really liked that Bumber Sticker people made out of the Gore/Lieberman ticket. "Sore Loserman". I mean, I know you didn't come up with that yourself. You've not had an original thought in your life. Now, on to your request... Not that you care...

In Snohomish County we learn yesterday that counted 282 more ballots than voters (158 mystery provisionals, and 124 mystery absentee ballots). And their elections director claimed in an interrogatory (you recognized that word, right?) she never adequately investigated these discrepancies. She claims Snohomish County does not have this data available in a computer report format nor can it electronically create a report with available data. To produce this list, elections staff must run an individual computer report for each precinct and its portions (approximately 1000 reports), which would identify the number of voters in a precinct portion who received credit for voting, tabulate the numbers in the precinct portions for a precinct total and then manually compare those numbers to the canvas for the November 2, 2004 election. So, apparently because it's too hard they just didn't both to do it, and are going with the discrepent numbers.

Dmadman, I have to ask: Were you skeptical of the outcome when it showed Rossi ahead by 50+ votes?

At least you are able to have the votes examined and recounted in Washington State. In Ohio, their recount was a joke. 3% of 3% were recounted by machine and when they didn't count properly, they were explained away as being "close enough". They even let the technicians service the computers BEFORE any recount and they posted a CHEAT Sheet to help with the recount.

If you can believe there were problems in Washintgon State, why can't you believe there were problems elsewhere? And why is it SO important that the votes be properly counted in the Governor's race but the Presidential race doesn't get the same outrage.

And for those that mentioned the closeness of the Florida outcome in 2000, you do know that the reason that Bush won by 537 votes was because that's where they were in the recount when the SUPREME COURT STOPPPED THE COUNTING. I believe that it has been proven and reported in various newspapers that Gore had more votes in Florida in 2000 when all the votes were counted.

Back to the original topic of this thread, Kerry is not being a sore loser. He conceded very quickly and let things more on - which has many annoyed with him. His focus in now on improving the transparency of the next elections and making sure that all people that are entitled to vote have an equal opportunity to do so. Whether you believe there was fraud or not, there were numerous irregulaties at many polling places. I don't understand how ANYONE can be against this reform unless they don't feel that all eligible people should be able to have their vote count.

 

[dmadman43]

Dmadman, I have to ask: Were you skeptical of the outcome when it showed Rossi ahead by 50+ votes?

At least you are able to have the votes examined and recounted in Washington State. In Ohio, their recount was a joke. 3% of 3% were recounted by machine and when they didn't count properly, they were explained away as being "close enough". They even let the technicians service the computers BEFORE any recount and they posted a CHEAT Sheet to help with the recount.

If you can believe there were problems in Washintgon State, why can't you believe there were problems elsewhere? And why is it SO important that the votes be properly counted in the Governor's race but the Presidential race doesn't get the same outrage.

And for those that mentioned the closeness of the Florida outcome in 2000, you do know that the reason that Bush won by 537 votes was because that's where they were in the recount when the SUPREME COURT STOPPPED THE COUNTING. I believe that it has been proven and reported in various newspapers that Gore had more votes in Florida in 2000 when all the votes were counted.

I wasn't as skeptical with a machine recount as I was with a hand recount. Machines don't care who wins, people who hand recount do. Good question, though. I felt the day after the election this would be a mess for whoever won. I think if Rossi won, people would still question how actually won the election.

Actually, regarding Florida, the majority of independent recount done afterwards showed Gore lost.

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/3-1-2001-2534.asp

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20010319&s=corn
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...ode=&contentId=A12623-2001Nov11&notFound=true

As for Ohio, the difference between that and Washington is margin of error, as with most presidential races in states. The margin of error usually is not close enough to warrant a hand recount.

 

[WWTBAMFAN]

dmadman

You obviously do not understand the legal issues involved in this case. The articles that I am relying from mainstream media are written by people who have at least read the Washington Constitution. There appears to be some severe problems with Dino's case in that the legislature appears to be the body with sole jurisdiction over this issue. I will post the link to the article that is taken from but I did find a pdf version of the Washington constitutuion online and this language is accurate.

The state Constitution carries a little- understood phrase that says "contested elections ... shall be decided by the Legislature in such manner as shall be determined by law."

It looks that the democrats are correct in saying that the courts have no jurisdiction on this issue. Just as contests to the certification of a slate of electors is decided by votes of the US Congress, the Washingon legislature appears to have the sole jurisdiction of this dispute.

You can conduct all of the discovery that you wish and you may find sufficient fraudulent votes to cast doubt about the election but such evidence is meaningless. If the courts do not have jurisdiction, then Dino is out of luck. Jurisdiction is the type of issue that will be litigated all the way to the Washington Supreme Court.

BTW, I have read enough to see that this case is really a way to discredit the properly elected governor. The PR campaign is good and may limited the duly elected governor of Washington's effectiveness.

In any event, this case will not be resolved quickly and Christine may be up for re-election before you get a final ruling.

 

[WWTBAMFAN]

I love your selective "research". I see Washington State is curiously missing from your list

Again, the Rossi campaign is not alledging fraud specifically.

First you claim that Washington State should be included in the list of states with voter fraud and now you are claiming that fraud is not part of the challenge by Dino? These two positions are not consistent.

 

[dmadman43]

dmadman

You obviously do not understand the legal issues involved in this case. The articles that I am relying from mainstream media are written by people who have at least read the Washington Constitution. There appears to be some severe problems with Dino's case in that the legislature appears to be the body with sole jurisdiction over this issue. I will post the link to the article that is taken from but I did find a pdf version of the Washington constitutuion online and this language is accurate. It looks that the democrats are correct in saying that the courts have no jurisdiction on this issue. Just as contests to the certification of a slate of electors is decided by votes of the US Congress, the Washingon legislature appears to have the sole jurisdiction of this dispute.

You can conduct all of the discovery that you wish and you may find sufficient fraudulent votes to cast doubt about the election but such evidence is meaningless. If the courts do not have jurisdiction, then Dino is out of luck. Jurisdiction is the type of issue that will be litigated all the way to the Washington Supreme Court.

BTW, I have read enough to see that this case is really a way to discredit the properly elected governor. The PR campaign is good and may limited the duly elected governor of Washington's effectiveness.

In any event, this case will not be resolved quickly and Christine may be up for re-election before you get a final ruling.

Stick to pushing contracts around. One really shouldn't attempt to practice a tract of law in which they are not well versed.

 

[dmadman43]

First you claim that Washington State should be included in the list of states with voter fraud and now you are claiming that fraud is not part of the challenge by Dino? These two positions are not consistent.

No they aren't. I never said fraud did not occur in the election. I said that fraud was not part of Rossi's challenge.

BTW, in case you misssed it on your unbiased perusal of the MSM on this issue

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002158407_felons23m.html

Scores of convicted felons voted illegally in the state's 2004 general election, and officials never noticed because of serious flaws in the system for tracking them, The Seattle Times has found.

The Times, reviewing felony convictions as far back as 1997, identified 129 felons in King and Pierce counties who were recorded as having voted in the Nov. 2 election. Another 23 likely voted. Several methods were used to confirm the findings.

Either the counties failed to flag or purge felons on the voter rolls as required by state law, or they allowed them to register without checking their status. Some were even mailed absentee ballots and returned them unchallenged.

The findings are almost certain to add to an already contentious debate over whether Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire's victory was legitimate

 

[WWTBAMFAN]

Poor dmadman, He does not understand what is happening in his own state and is focuing on the wrong issues. See http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?category=6420&slug=WA Election Challenge Legal

Constitutional issues, not dead voters, key in election challenge

WENATCHEE, Wash. -- Allegations of dead voters and election fraud elicit gasps from outraged voters and pundits, but they won't really matter in the legal challenge to the Washington governor's election.

As legal arguments unfolded in court last week, it became clear the case will turn instead on a close reading of the state constitution. Who has jurisdiction over election challenges - the courts or the Legislature? What is an "illegal vote"? What kind of proof does the constitution require to nullify an election?

These questions lack the sexy sparkle of voting felons, true, but the answers will determine whether Gov. Christine Gregoire stays in office.

But there is both good and bad news for dmadman. At least one GOP lawyer has read the Washington State Constitution and as a result, a challenge has finally be filed with the body with jurisdiction over the issue, the Washington State Legislature. See http://www.boston.com/dailynews/023/nation/Republicans_file_challenge_in_:.shtml

SEATTLE (AP) The state's Republicans, still pressing their court challenge to the disputed governor's election, have filed a separate challenge with the state Legislature.

But dmadman should not his hopes up too much because these challenges have no chance.

State Democratic Party spokeswoman Kirstin Brost said the move indicated Republicans are afraid they won't win in court.

''The Republicans are in a hopeless situation,'' Brost said. ''What we have seen in the last couple weeks is them floundering and grasping at straws trying to find some way to undo the election results.''

Dmadman, I will be glad to explain to you what is going on in Washington since you have been wrong in all of your claims so far. Remember, illegal votes do not matter one little bit unless the courts have jurisdiction over the issue and the Washington Constitution is prettly clear that only the Legislature and not the courts have jurisdicton.

 

[WWTBAMFAN]

It appears that dmadman has given up his amusing attempt to mislead the board about what is going on in Washtingon state and so let gets back to the original topic, i.e. whether Senator Kerry should have commented on the election results and voter intimidation by the GOP.

Here are some more examples why the GOP is the part of voter intimidation and fraud. See http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oId=16368

Here are a few examples of recent incidents in which groups of voters have been singled out on the basis of race.

This year in Florida, the state ordered the implementation of a “potential felon” purge list to remove voters from the rolls, in a disturbing echo of the infamous 2000 purge, which removed thousands of eligible voters, primarily African-Americans, from the rolls. The state abandoned the plan after news media investigations revealed that the 2004 list also included thousands of people who were eligible to vote, and heavily targeted African-Americans while virtually ignoring Hispanic voters.

This summer, Michigan state Rep. John Pappageorge (R-Troy) was quoted in the Detroit Free Press as saying, “If we do not suppress the Detroit vote, we're going to have a tough time in this election.” African Americans comprise 83% of Detroit’s population.

In South Dakota’s June 2004 primary, Native American voters were prevented from voting after they were challenged to provide photo IDs, which they were not required to present under state or federal law.

In Kentucky in July 2004, Black Republican officials joined to ask their State GOP party chairman to renounce plans to place “vote challengers” in African-American precincts during the coming elections.

Earlier this year in Texas, a local district attorney claimed that students at a majority black college were not eligible to vote in the county where the school is located. It happened in Waller County – the same county where 26 years earlier, a federal court order was required to prevent discrimination against the students.

In 2003 in Philadelphia, voters in African American areas were systematically challenged by men carrying clipboards, driving a fleet of some 300 sedans with magnetic signs designed to look like law enforcement insignia.

In 2002 in Louisiana, flyers were distributed in African American communities telling voters they could go to the polls on Tuesday, December 10th – three days after a Senate runoff election was actually held.

In 1998 in South Carolina, a state representative mailed 3,000 brochures to African American neighborhoods, claiming that law enforcement agents would be “working” the election, and warning voters that “this election is not worth going to jail.”

The fact that a conservative on this thread accused the democrats of cheating is just wrong and misguided. It is the GOP that is the part of voter intimidation and voter fraud.

 

[frozone]

Thanks for posting that list about voter intimidation. I was aware of some of these cases but not all of them.