« Eight Vote “Victory” Within The Margin of Fraud | Home | From Ohio To Washington… And Back Again »
Washington Court OKs Counting “Houdini Ballots”
By Matt Margolis | December 22, 2004
Washington state’s Supreme Court will allow those magical mystery ballots from King County to be counted in the highly contested gubernatorial race between Gregoire and Rossi.
King County is a Democratic stronghold, the biggest county in the state and the last to report results from the statewide hand recount that began Dec. 8.
The ruling was a boost to the Democrats, who even before the decision were claiming victory, saying their own analysis showed that even without the belated ballots, Gregoire had erased Republican Dino Rossi’s slim lead and won the race by just eight votes out of 2.9 million cast.
Is it over now? I don’t know. If Gregoire is inaugurated as Governor, a majority of Washington state will probably not consider her to be a legitimate governor.
Sound Politics continues to cover this election.
Topics: General |
Related Posts:
December 23rd, 2004 at 2:10 am
I am very frustrated with our Gov. Race. I feel as though the Dems a have pushed and pushed to get what they want. They can can claim anything they want, but you will not convice me this was a fair election. I believe every vote should count, but where do you draw the line. I guess the line was draw by the Supreme loser justices. Our Supreme court continually makes bad decisions, and did again. I would like all votes to count, but I think K.C. should be hugly fined for there very costly mistake that has now changed teh rules. Thanks Wa. Supremes and K.C. for changing the rules and causing a mess.
December 23rd, 2004 at 8:27 am
Legally, it’s pretty clear that the Washington Supreme Court made the right choice, just as it’s clear that mistakes were made in KC. Regardless, it’s good to see all the votes get counted so the nation can shift its focus from Olympia.
December 23rd, 2004 at 9:05 am
Start Your Engines
Matt Margolis has two whines here and here. Not one for understatement, Matt offers, without any proof that, “in a manual recount, I think that’s within the margin of fraud.”