It's just like those Dumbocrats to go running to the Supreme Court to bail their loser candidate out.

If we had stopped counting the votes in time this would never have happened.

"If ever there was a need for a revote in this country, this is it."

Revote or *revolt*?

But the election now meets the definition of every vote counted. (i.e. the democrats won)

Yes. Thank God we got a legitimately elected president in 2000 by several hundred votes in a state where there was absolutely no suppression, fraud or other shenanigans.

If memory serves me right, Gore never had the lead in Florida. The only change in voting numbers was a close in the gap between the two candidates. In this case, the other candidate has actually taken the lead.

"J", you're very quick to point to (disproven) questions regarding the 2000 election, yet you won't discuss the fact that the number of votes outnumbered the number of voters in King County, WA alone by 3500. Doesn't that seem odd to you?

And if you have such a strong conviction in your candidate, wouldn't you want another election to ensure that there is a clear victory as opposed to this odiferous Chicagoesque count?

Ah, but you're a moonbat -- and logic escapes you.

Forgive me.

The WA election is what is commonly called FUBAR or in laymans terms a cluster f*ck

I may be wrong but this is a system in need of someone with more than a double digit IQ. How hard is it to come up with a system for voting?

If the Democrats in Washington state actually cared about the process instead of the outcome, they'd join the calls for a revote.

"How hard is it to come up with a system for voting?"

Damned near impossible, Tom.

Check the proposals -- nay, the demands -- for reform after the 2000 Presidential election. Check how many of the same people who demanded those reforms turned against them when it became evident that they would produce the desired results.

But come, as I am a mere naysayer, why don't you put forth a proposal for a system of voting?

John, there seems to be a number of states that do not have these problems. Maybe if the disciples of the old Daly Democratic Regime were to be replaced in the party with someone without ties to ACT, ACORN et.al.Just a thought.

There is a principal at stake here that is easilly overlooked. Democrats (and their judicial allies) rail about 'counting every vote', and that is important. But it is simple truth that every _illegitimate_ vote counted nullifies a legitimate vote just as surely as not counting a proper one.
_At a bare minimum_, 3539 votes have been nullified in Washington. That is every bit as bad as taking 3539 republican votes and shredding them. It amounts to precisely the same thing. Lets not forget that.

Just a minor correction. Rossi won the initial count by 261 votes, not a few thousand. The first recount yielded a Rossi win by 42 votes. The second (manual) recount yielded the 129 vote Gregoire win.

In St. Louis (where I am an election judge - here is an essay on the experience) Provo ballots are bright purple. I usually pull one or two out of the ballot box when the deputies came by to pick them up, since if there isn't an envelope with the voter's info on them, the ballot is completely useless. I marked them spoiled and shipped them to HQ in a seperate container (according to procedure)

Why these coastal folk who are oh-so-smarter than we red-staters couldn't come up with this safeguard is beyond me.

Tim McNabb
fivehundredwords.com

They also say (some people in Washington State) that the military votes WEREN'T COUNTED. Ahem, ~*no wonder the Democrats won*~.

Cannot Democrats just win elections honestly and normally without manipulating the outcomes? I don't think so, at this point, too much information to the contrary, nationwide, even among liberal areas, that election fraud is pervasive in most Democrat "wins" by one means or another. I know I've experienced it, right here in my district.

Washington State needs a new election. I sure hope that they manage to do that, hope that there's enough support in the state for one.

Were the votes regularly given is the relevant legal question.

Wait, we were talking about Ohio, weren't we?

Washington state's King County is CORRUPT! but the people are with the Republican--and this is a dem-leaning state! almost 60% want a revote! Unheard of!

It escapes me that the democrats/liberals have had 20+ years of running Washington State and as of yet, have not fixed the voting issues they so passionately (much like the democrats during the 2000 election) state must be fixed. If it was so important to them, why have they not resolved the issue(s) prior to reaching this election? Kind of reminds me of things that make me go hmmm. Also, can't help but wonder why "Chris" or is it "Christine" (which it use to be) - oh I guess it's an identity crisis - won't agree to a revote if she's so sure she "won" - could it be that she really knows the truth... with out King County [helping her...] she would never have reached the position where she could be "appointed" Governor...

At the end of the day, she is not and will never be my Governor and on my Birthday, 1/11/05 I'll drive to Olympia and participate in my first ever protest against someone who is unwilling to really do what the "People" are asking for - a revote.

Chris Gregoire - if you really think you deserve to be Governor, then step up to the plate as a true leader would do, and agree to a revote.

It's nice to see that others have noticed, but you didn't quite get the numbers correct. Rossi led by 261 after the initial count and by 49 after the first recount. Gregoire led by 129 after the second (and final) recount. Now, we wait to see if the election will be invalidated based on the number of illegal votes cast and counted.

Can't Washington just review the list of registered voters and then match up ballots cast to that list? Is that too much to ask? Not on the list, then the ballot is discarded.

And include ALL ballots cast by ALL registered voters with no provisionals automatically washed in, but individually reviewed to match THEM with registrations, or, not, one at a time.

I can't see that that's so difficult especially in a state that has had a lot of time to, um, practice. I was reading an article yesterday whereby some state voter administrative person or other was excusing all the problems by saying that 'the state has a lot of residents and they are all unique so they all have unique voter circumstances' and the like, combined with the fact that "a lot of volunteers" were involved in these recount procedures (and, therefore, the guy excused any errors they 'may have made' because they were, you know, just ordinary folks, just ordinary volunteers and ordinary people, you know, make mistakes but, you know, so what, that's what, you know, ordinary people DO...

So, that means that the Democrat candidate won.

The formula used, apparently. Ordinary voters, ordinary people involved and volunteering, making ordinary mistakes that can't possibly be avoided, so, hey, win for the Democrat.

WASHINGTON STATE NEEDS A REVOTE.

"Can't Washington just review the list of registered voters and then match up ballots cast to that list?"

How? Assuming for the sake of argument that the registration list is to be presumed to be accurate, how does one match an anonymous ballot with a name on that list?