Why Christine Gregoire Annoys Me
Since I voted for the Libertarian candidate for governor in the Washington State race, I didn’t really care whether Republican Dino Rossi or Democrat Christine Gregoire won. I figured one would be as bad as the other.
I must admit, however, that when I read Gregoire’s statements about the need for more recounts, I’m starting to hope that Rossi wins.
Number one, Gregoire just reminds me too much of Hillary Clinton in her physical appearance and her mannerisms.
But it’s totally misleading statements like this (from a Seattle Times article published on 11/26/04) that really make me nervous about having her as governor:
She and her Democratic allies said they would ask for another recount, this time with the ballots counted by hand instead of machine. But they had not decided whether to request a statewide recount or just in selected counties. If a partial recount changed the election outcome, state law mandates a hand recount in the rest of the state.
"Some people have suggested that Senator Rossi and I stage a duel or flip a coin to break this tie," Gregoire said. "But I prefer to count every vote."
Rossi, who was on a Caribbean cruise with his family, didn’t get the recount news until late in the day. But in a written statement, he urged Gregoire to concede.
Secretary of State Sam Reed said yesterday he and Gov. Gary Locke will certify Rossi’s victory Tuesday. Gregoire and the Democrats will then have three days to request a recount.
After that, the state will be in uncharted territory.[emphasis mine]
Why does she keep insisting that the race is a tie when Rossi has won on both the initial count and the automatic recount?
She claims that she prefers to "count every vote" as an alternative to a coin toss or duel.
What if Rossi wins by just one vote on a manual recount?
Will that one vote count?
I think not. The 261 votes that gave him his initial victory didn’t count. The 42 votes that gave him a victory on the recount don’t seem to count.
She pretends they aren’t there and that the race is a tie. It’s not a tie. Even if one candidate won by only one vote, it would not be a tie. But, while she claims that she wants every vote to count, as long as she refers to the race as a tie then votes that give her opponent the victory don’t matter at all. She has completely rejected them as legitimate votes.
If the manual recount changes the outcome, then of course there will have to be another recount because Rossi would still have won on two out of three counts.
We could be at this until the spring of 2005.
She is also implying that there is something inherently flawed with the two automated counts that have been done so far. To say that she prefers that every vote count after two counts is to suggest that all the votes where not counted. What evidence does she have? What is to assure that a manual recount will count all the votes better than a machine count?
So maybe all elections in the future should be counted by hand?
| Go to Home - Most Recent Posts