Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Republicans

Journal pudge's Journal: What Next in WA? 37

Journal by pudge

The TV station KING 5 in Seattle did a poll about the recent election, asking residents across the state (not just voters). The results (with a margin of error at 4.5%) surprised me.

53 percent to 36 percent said Rossi should not concede. 56-35 percent said he won (down from 66-24 before the hand recount). And a whopping 59-38 percent said we should have a new election.

What surprised me most, apart from the fact that the current loser is perceived by a solid majority to be the winner, is that more people want a new election than think he won, or that he should not concede. I would think that number should be smaller than the others.

And what sort of person would say that Rossi should concede, but that they do not think Gregoire is the winner? There's at least a few of those.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What Next in WA? More

What Next in WA?

Comments Filter:
  • I seem to remember seeing it as slim as 7 votes. Regardless, if I was a WA state resident, I'd want a new runoff election, simply because the margins are just too slim and I remember seeing a sizeable minority voting for third parties. We're down to the margin of error here.

    Anyway... you guys do what you like. I'm not big on the whole telling other states what to do/donating money thing.

    • We're down to the margin of error here.

      Statistically speaking, there's no such thing in a straight poll. You just asked the entire population (eligible & registered voters who bothered to vote), so no statistical margin of error exists, since you were not trying to extrapolate what others think from a smaller sample.

      Just wanted to toss that out there. Reporters have fucked that one up for us, as they rarely know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to polls.

  • Those numbers are amazing. The fact that they come from WA of all places... Well, it demonstrates the shift that's been happening in WA over the last few decades better than anything else could. The MAJORITY think he won. The MAJORITY don't think he should concede. The MAJORITY think there should be a new election.

    Wow. Just. Wow.

    • I went to bed early on New Years Eve. When the fireworks started my first thought of the new year was:

      SHUT UP!!!

      I am guessing that it was my subconscious screaming for an end to this fiasco, but I might be wrong.
    • The MAJORITY think he won. The MAJORITY don't think he should concede. The MAJORITY think there should be a new election. Wow. Just. Wow.

      Pfft. Its just one poll. What questions were asked? How were they asked? Who was asked? Finding out how the polling was done would be just as interesting as the final percentage.**

      **Yes, the radio's website might have that info, but when I went to their page, they wanted me to register before letting me see anything. And they apparantly block Bugmenot. And disabl
      • It's a TV station, not a web site. And that the poll cannot be fully trusted is a given, IMO. It's worth nothing it was done by a reputable polling firm (SurveyUSA).
  • And what sort of person would say that Rossi should concede, but that they do not think Gregoire is the winner? There's at least a few of those.

    Someone who believes in preserving the appearance of validity in the system? Someone who might say "The system produced this outcome, we should honor it, and not paralyze this State." Interesting since it seems comparable to a Deomcrat saying Kerry should concede because contesting the election would paralyze the nation.

    more people want a new election than thi
    • Someone who believes in preserving the appearance of validity in the system? Someone who might say "The system produced this outcome, we should honor it, and not paralyze this State."

      So they believe in preserving the appearance of validity, while not believing it actually is valid? Heh. That's odd to me.

    • I'd very much like to see a breakdown for peoples' reasons why they want a new one.

      Here's a breakdown. It's too narrow a Margin. Dino Rossi won the first two counts, Gregoire pushes for an even more inaccurate hand recount, and then wins the thrid recount. When she was down by a margin of what she has now won by, she was calling it a tie and saying she won't concede. Now she is saying she won and Rossi should concede. A lot of people, even Democrats thinks this is bad. A LOT of people see Gregoire a
  • Just as in 2000 with Bush winning the electoral votes, but not winning more popular votes than Gore, the system needs to follow the rules.

    It doesn't make sense for the rules to be rewritten because of a close race. The rules need to be followed. If this recount has been done and it shows the winner to only have won by a handful of votes, so be it.

    Now, this does not mean that areas where fraud is believed to have occured should not be investigated, but to decide now that a new election should occur inval
    • also, didn't running the government based on polling go out of style with the Clinton administration?

      ps Pudge why so quiet lately? Almost no posting in the journal during the hand recount and no posting in the Mac section for a while. What's up?

      • Busy. Posting less in Apple because doing more coding (which is my primary job responsibility). Posting less here because busy with other things, taking a break.

        (I got your email, I just didn't get around to answering it. :-)
        • I dunno if ~CmdrTaco's last JE and the moderation system has anything to do with what you have been coding, but since I can't post there, maybe you are able to pass along an idea...

          Instead of allowing moderators to leave comments to the poster (or m2'r), allow the m2'r to leave a message to the moderator. I've stopped m2'ing because when I'd just unfair an informative it didn't let the mod know why... It'd be nice to let someone know that a Michael Moore comment isn't insightful, but much more inciteful
          • email cmdrtaco. I do. He sometimes says if you are unable to reply to his JE, reply to him with an email.
            • Good idea ... That or ...

              This discussion was created by CmdrTaco (1) as Friends and Friends
              of Friends only. Offer them or one of their friends a bribe and maybe
              they will let you post.

              Hey, pudge... need a new mac?
              • Please stop this off-topic discussion. I did pass that suggestion along, but do not consider that an endorsement of your off-topic posting actions. Thanks. :-)
          • I think the two-way communication is a good idea. It will probably lead to some bitterness, but on the whole it will make M2 more accurate, and I would actually be more willing to M2 if I could read comments and make some.
    • Yes, I am not currently in favor of a new election, though I reserve the right to change my mind if I see strong evidence that this election is untrustworthy, due to significant fraud, or somesuch.
      • I am, but only because I really want Rossi to win, and Gregoire is kinda scary to me and I don't trust her.

        my wife OTOH says she just wants it to be over so she can stop hearing about it.
      • With the margin so slim, "significant fraud" should be fairly small.

        I'd be more concerned with poorly run polling stations. I'm in California -- and my polling place appeared to be mishandling provisional ballots.

        Provisional ballots SHOULD be put aside in an envolope for later validation that the voter was in fact registered and/or had not already voted elsewhere.

        What they WERE doing -- at least on ONE particular vote was to take it and were about to put it in the REGULAR votes. I noticed this and chim
        • With the margin so slim, "significant fraud" should be fairly small.

          It depends on how you look at it; I know simple math tells us that 130 fraudulent votes for Gregoire should be enough to take some action, but slightly more complex math tells us that we won't uncover all the problems, and we need to have some sort of framework for determining how we will judge and weight abnormalities. I don't know what form that framework should take.

          The nature of the problems matters. Apparently, there were some vot
    • In fairness, the system (and Rossi) IS following the rules. WA state election law SPECIFICALLY allows for an election contest (there is some question as to whether the courts decide or the legislature). He is not inventing anything here. The rules are NOT being rewritten[1]. A (potential for a) new election being held as the result of a contest is PART of the rules, as writtten, pre-election.

      As far as "sucking it up and taking one for the team." Nope, that (unwrittten) rule went away 4 years ago...

      [1]I

      • In fairness, the system (and Rossi) IS following the rules. WA state election law SPECIFICALLY allows for an election contest

        Right, *if* it can be proven that the there was a serious problem with the election as it was conducted. We need to find that out, first.
        • I wonder *if* fraud should be investigated whether or not it would affect the election? Thoughts?
          • Sure. But the timeframe is less severe if it is not going to affect the outcome of the election. :-)
            • I wonder what the big fuss about checking into Ohio's irregularities is. As it won't affect the election, it would seem, as you confirmed, that it would be good to know but the timeframe isn't as big an issue...

              As long as there's time to learn from those mistakes/problems before the next election.
              • Well, the question is, if the Dems care so much about fixing irregularities regardless of the political impact, why are they hyperfocusing on Ohio, when there are other and more significant problems elsewhere?

                I don't think anyone is saying we should not check out the problems, only that we shouldn't hold up the certification of the election for it.
  • When an election comes down to a razor-thin margin in the votes, put it to a round of paper, rock, scissors. It's a simple game of chance involving no third parties and would permit no arguments of mishandling or corruption in the process -- much cleaner than when we get lawyers and election officials involved.
    • A razor thing margin is still a margin. This not statistical analysis. If the Celtics beat the Lakers by a buzzer-beating three-pointer, and wins 147-146, they win. Only if you can show that the Celtics got more points than they earned, or the Lakers didn't get as many as they deserved, can you justify changing the outcome.
  • Hey pudge,

    Do you have an archive somewhere of these "rants" you wrote back in 2000? I'd like to read them again:

    RR 4.08/This IS The Will of the People (2000-11-10)

    RR 4.09/Every Vote Should Not Count (2000-11-27)

    Google and Archive.org don't have copies.

Slashdot Top Deals

If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker to come along would destroy civilization.

Close