Not counting votes…
Democrat takes lead in Washington recount.
The judge got it right on this election:
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Justices questioned Republican claims that counting the votes would cause irreparable harm. “You’re looking at it from the point of view of the winner or the loser - shouldn’t we be looking at it from the point of view of the voter?” asked Justice Susan Owens. |
The Republicans & the corrupt Supreme Court did the same thing in FL in 2000, i.e., they wanted the counting to stop.
Update - after three vote tallies and 58 days of waiting, Democrat Christine Gregoire was declared Washington’s governor-elect on Thursday. But her Republican rival did not concede and wants a new election.
Mr Soul
yawn
Care factor zero.
I live in King County and this wasn’t a Republican trick – it’s state law, and the law that passed was supported by Dino Rossi. The state Secretary of State, who is Republican, said there was no fraud, that mistakes were made but everything was above board, and that he was confident that the right thing was done.
The irony is that the Republicans tactics probably lost the election for Rossi. They pressed to have votes thrown out in King County that had been mistakenly not counted in the first two vote counts. When those votes were included in the third count the Republicans should have pressed to have all disallowed votes to be reexamined statewide - something they actually could have and should have done from the start. They didn’t. As a result only King County included votes not counte the first two times. King County is a very heavy Democrat county, yet many other counties are very heavily Republican. It wouldn’t take many new votes included in those counties to put Rossi over the top on the third recount.
State law implements automatic recounts when there is a close race. The first recount is a machine recount. If the vote is closer than some very small percent, like .1% (% ??), then a there is a third hand recount. The law does it this way because it considers the hand recount to be the most accurate.
Nothing to debate…yes…even though I live in Washington and King County, this is a yawner. Nothing like Florida. Even though the race was the closes governors race in US history it is now history itself.
Of course, there is also a law in this state that says ANYONE, any individual, can content the outcome in court. That might make things interesting later.
Until then…yawn.
Phoo - you’ve re-iterated everything I was talking about. However, somebody was calling for a new election - who was that? Where does it stand now? She’s the governor elect but the Republicans might fight it - correct, or has the guy conceded?
It was like FL in the sense that the vote was close and rec-counts were done. Where it differed was that a hand re-count was actually done in WA, whereas it should have been done in FL also. I mean Bush winning by +500 votes - very unlikely IMO. Yes - I know the Miami Herald & others re-counted the votes in FL in 2000 but the state should have done it.
However, somebody was calling for a new election - who was that?Rossi wrote a letter to Christine Gregoire, and she declined -- http://www.dinorossi.com/
Where does it stand now?Nowhere yet. One informal poll showed that over 70% statewide favor a new election. In this state that would mean democrats overwhelmingly favor a new election as well as republicans. It's unlikely to happen though. To happen the state legislature would have to order it and fund it ($4 million at least). My guess is that the governor would be picked by the house before before it would get that far. The Secretary of the State could get involved but he's already said no way. He certified the election and went out of his way to say there was no evidence of fraud, and he's a republican. Don't try to make it a political issue when it isn't one. It's a bi-partisan issue and a legitimately close race. I think Sam Reed (Sec of State) knows that if there is a revote that Rossi will do a LOT worse than the first time around. There's no need to waste $4 million for political party gain when it won't accomplish the goal.
She's the governor elect but the Republicans might fight it - correct, or has the guy conceded?No, he hasn't conceded, but the point is moot unless the legislature steps in, or the courts accept any lawsuits that haven't been filed yet. The normal legal paths are being walked down as they should be.
As I mentioned earlier, any citizen can file a lawsuit and challenge the election, including Rossi, head of the republic party, or anyone else. They would have to prove fraud and there doesn't appear to be any grounds for that - mistakes yes, but not even major mistakes on the Florida order, misplaced or disallowed ballots is all - fraud no. That's bad in a tight race. A revote won't fix any of that. The same mistakes that happened the first time are likely to happen again unless they change the election process before any revote.
Some republicans were accusing the democtrats of trying to change the rules in mid-stream, but that was not the case and the court said so. The rules change they were talking about was the rule that through out some absentee ballots because the signatures didn't match those on record. No rules were changed but the votes that were not allowed were mistkatently not allowed because no one ever compared them with the signatiures on record. There was no rule change to allow those votes to be counted. The reason for the recount is to revisit all ballots. Looks at it this way, in a heavily democrat county why would a huge pile of ballots be disallowed if the democrats were trying to throw the election in their favor? Belly aching about this is politics as usual, but it's over unless someone wants to sue and has evidence that these ballots were incorrectly included by way of fraud, and that has already been delt with in the court.
You appear to be fishing to make something out of very little. I live here and it doesn't concern me. It would concern me a lot if I though there appeared to be some underhanded stuff going on. There is no legitimate fodder for republican bashing to be found in this case. Not yet anyway. Out of 3 million votes they were only 46 votes apart after the machine recount and a little over 150 votes apart after a hand recount. That's actually very little change for 3 million votes.
For the record I voted for Rossi. In this state at this time I feel like he was the better choice, and I am intensely non-republican on most issues and do not agree with his views on a lot of things and REALLY disagree on some things. But as governor most of those issues will never cross his path. They would if he were to be elected as a US Senator or US House member and there's no way I could support him in that case. Gregoire on the other hand has been in high level office for many years, and has shown a great lack of oversight in many instances (cost the state millions of dollars). I don't think she's totally qualified to be governor because of her past performance, but she's not totally unqualified either. I also don't think many of her ideas about how to fix things in the state economy will fly and may do a lot of harm. But, she'll do ok and if Rossi were to eventually win he'll do ok. There is only so much the governor can do in this state. Only in the eyes of those bent of partisan politics will there be problems regardless of which ever one takes office. This should help you understand how a republican could come so close to winning in this state.
Where does it stand now?Nowhere yet. One informal poll showed that over 70% statewide favor a new election. In this state that would mean democrats overwhelmingly favor a new election as well as republicans. It's unlikely to happen though. To happen the state legislature would have to order it and fund it ($4 million at least). My guess is that the governor would be picked by the house before before it would get that far. The Secretary of the State could get involved but he's already said no way. He certified the election and went out of his way to say there was no evidence of fraud, and he's a republican. Don't try to make it a political issue when it isn't one. It's a bi-partisan issue and a legitimately close race. I think Sam Reed (Sec of State) knows that if there is a revote that Rossi will do a LOT worse than the first time around. There's no need to waste $4 million for political party gain when it won't accomplish the goal.
She's the governor elect but the Republicans might fight it - correct, or has the guy conceded?No, he hasn't conceded, but the point is moot unless the legislature steps in, or the courts accept any lawsuits that haven't been filed yet. The normal legal paths are being walked down as they should be.
As I mentioned earlier, any citizen can file a lawsuit and challenge the election, including Rossi, head of the republic party, or anyone else. They would have to prove fraud and there doesn't appear to be any grounds for that - mistakes yes, but not even major mistakes on the Florida order, misplaced or disallowed ballots is all - fraud no. That's bad in a tight race. A revote won't fix any of that. The same mistakes that happened the first time are likely to happen again unless they change the election process before any revote.
Some republicans were accusing the democtrats of trying to change the rules in mid-stream, but that was not the case and the court said so. The rules change they were talking about was the rule that through out some absentee ballots because the signatures didn't match those on record. No rules were changed but the votes that were not allowed were mistkatently not allowed because no one ever compared them with the signatiures on record. There was no rule change to allow those votes to be counted. The reason for the recount is to revisit all ballots. Looks at it this way, in a heavily democrat county why would a huge pile of ballots be disallowed if the democrats were trying to throw the election in their favor? Belly aching about this is politics as usual, but it's over unless someone wants to sue and has evidence that these ballots were incorrectly included by way of fraud, and that has already been delt with in the court.
You appear to be fishing to make something out of very little. I live here and it doesn't concern me. It would concern me a lot if I though there appeared to be some underhanded stuff going on. There is no legitimate fodder for republican bashing to be found in this case. Not yet anyway. Out of 3 million votes they were only 46 votes apart after the machine recount and a little over 150 votes apart after a hand recount. That's actually very little change for 3 million votes.
For the record I voted for Rossi. In this state at this time I feel like he was the better choice, and I am intensely non-republican on most issues and do not agree with his views on a lot of things and REALLY disagree on some things. But as governor most of those issues will never cross his path. They would if he were to be elected as a US Senator or US House member and there's no way I could support him in that case. Gregoire on the other hand has been in high level office for many years, and has shown a great lack of oversight in many instances (cost the state millions of dollars). I don't think she's totally qualified to be governor because of her past performance, but she's not totally unqualified either. I also don't think many of her ideas about how to fix things in the state economy will fly and may do a lot of harm. But, she'll do ok and if Rossi were to eventually win he'll do ok. There is only so much the governor can do in this state. Only in the eyes of those bent of partisan politics will there be problems regardless of which ever one takes office. This should help you understand how a republican could come so close to winning in this state.
You appear to be fishing to make something out of very little. I live here and it doesn't concern me. It would concern me a lot if I though there appeared to be some underhanded stuff going on. There is no legitimate fodder for republican bashing to be found in this case.
No - I am merely pointing out that a "common" Republican technique/trick/guideline, or whatever you want to call it, is not to count the votes. Don't you remember their mantra in 2000 - we counted the votes over and over again.
This was their strategy in WA now and it was their strategy in FL in 2000. They didn't want to do it in OH in 2004 (even though it wouldn't have made a difference).
And now that the votes have been counted, they want a new election, which is a stupid & baseless request. In WA has a new election now, then I want a new election for 2000 because Gore won that election IMO. Stupid - right?
The election for governor in WA further illustrates how divided a nation we are.
Mr Soul
No - I am merely pointing out that a "common" Republican technique/trick/guideline, or whatever you want to call it, is not to count the votes. Don't you remember their mantra in 2000 - we counted the votes over and over again.
This was their strategy in WA now and it was their strategy in FL in 2000. They didn't want to do it in OH in 2004 (even though it wouldn't have made a difference).
And now that the votes have been counted, they want a new election, which is a stupid & baseless request. In WA has a new election now, then I want a new election for 2000 because Gore won that election IMO. Stupid - right?
The election for governor in WA further illustrates how divided a nation we are.
Mr Soul
The election for governor in WA further illustrates how divided a nation we are.
No. It shows that the system we have has a process that while not perfect works for the most part. It's those that won't let it go that have problems. Don't you see that your attitude is as much a major reason for the division as views opposing your own? The divide will never go away as long you go in looking for a reason to be divided.
If you didn't vote in WA don't complain and don't try to make something out of the way it was handled here. It a party's right (either party) to challenge these counts and if they don't or can't then the system cant work. Don't you see that it's a good thing that the republicans CAN go to court to get this stuff sorted out? Their tactics may be to suppress votes they think are not valid. That is a GOOD thing. If those votes had indeed been invalid would it be a good thing to have counted them anyway just so a democrat would be elected? It was RIGHT to challenge the votes validity in court. The fact that republicans brought the suit is irrelevant. If the democrats had been ahead by 46 votes and there were 700 new votes found in Spokane than I would expect, I would hope, that those votes would have been challenged as well. The fact is no new votes were found in other counties that had the appearance of suspiciousness. There were new votes included in many counties, but neither party thought there was any reason to challenge their inclusion.
The system works. Every state a a different system. Some states do it better. It doesn't work when it doesn't go through the process of that state. Even Florida, as partisan as it looked to outsiders, worked. It wasn't the republicans that caused the problem. It was the way the votes were cast that made it virtually impossible to get an accurate count after the fact. To continue to blame Florida because your guy didn't win is to continue ugly partisan politics. This is why I think you are an idiot without a clue.
After all not many folks brought up the California election process -- not eve you. Look at your own state and get things fixed there first.
No. It shows that the system we have has a process that while not perfect works for the most part. It's those that won't let it go that have problems. Don't you see that your attitude is as much a major reason for the division as views opposing your own? The divide will never go away as long you go in looking for a reason to be divided.
If you didn't vote in WA don't complain and don't try to make something out of the way it was handled here. It a party's right (either party) to challenge these counts and if they don't or can't then the system cant work. Don't you see that it's a good thing that the republicans CAN go to court to get this stuff sorted out? Their tactics may be to suppress votes they think are not valid. That is a GOOD thing. If those votes had indeed been invalid would it be a good thing to have counted them anyway just so a democrat would be elected? It was RIGHT to challenge the votes validity in court. The fact that republicans brought the suit is irrelevant. If the democrats had been ahead by 46 votes and there were 700 new votes found in Spokane than I would expect, I would hope, that those votes would have been challenged as well. The fact is no new votes were found in other counties that had the appearance of suspiciousness. There were new votes included in many counties, but neither party thought there was any reason to challenge their inclusion.
The system works. Every state a a different system. Some states do it better. It doesn't work when it doesn't go through the process of that state. Even Florida, as partisan as it looked to outsiders, worked. It wasn't the republicans that caused the problem. It was the way the votes were cast that made it virtually impossible to get an accurate count after the fact. To continue to blame Florida because your guy didn't win is to continue ugly partisan politics. This is why I think you are an idiot without a clue.
After all not many folks brought up the California election process -- not eve you. Look at your own state and get things fixed there first.
| Quote (phoo @ Jan. 03 2005,12:26) |
| This is why I think you are an idiot without a clue. |
Ouch! that's gotta hurt!
Ladies, handbags ready.....
Seriously Mike, you do have a nack for rubbing people the wrong way. I kind of friction affliction, usually due to your need to read into political aggendas. Last time I checked we're not in a civil war with our opposing parties, simply freindly compotition, which I think is healthy.
I'm ready for a third independent party myself...who know's what the future my hold.
Keep shinin' guys...
jerm
Phoo - you’re missing my point about the divided nation. When you have an election, which was the closest in WA’s history as I understand, won by 128 votes (out of millions of votes cast), I would argue that it shows that WA is divided. Surely, you would agree with this statement?
My further point is that WA’s results are indicative of the nation, i.e., that we’re pretty divided as a country right now. I realize that you could disagree with this statement but I do believe that the 2000 & 2004 Presidential election illustrates that we are divided as a nation.
I am not commenting about the voting system in WA, so again, you’re missing my point. Indeed, the system has seemed to work, a point that the governor-elect has made several times.
| Quote (phoo @ Jan. 03 2005,12:26) |
| The election for governor in WA further illustrates how divided a nation we are. |
No. It shows that the system we have has a process that while not perfect works for the most part. It's those that won't let it go that have problems. Don't you see that your attitude is as much a major reason for the division as views opposing your own? The divide will never go away as long you go in looking for a reason to be divided.
Hmmm....Phoo... You are smarter than the average bear! There's truth in them thar words! Example; I have a lot on my mind about my job and such, other than that, happy as a clam in muck. The wife sees my contemplative state as something is wrong and I am upset with her or the kids. Even after explaining the situation, she will badger me about it until I AM pissed! (Why do women have to do that?!?!?!) The same principle applies to "mob" situations as well. If you go in looking for and expecting crap...guess what you find?
TG
Thanks, TG. My kids sure know how to push them PO buttons, too. Some times I think we need bigger closets, and with with locks. 
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| My further point is that WA’s results are indicative of the nation, i.e., that we’re pretty divided as a country right now. I realize that you could disagree with this statement but I do believe that the 2000 & 2004 Presidential election illustrates that we are divided as a nation. |
A close election does not prove division. It might mean there is little difference in the candidates. Of course, that’s not the case, but because a race it close doesn’t go to prove anything except that a similar number of folks wanted different candidates. What does prove a divided nation is how folks keep things dragging on instead of accepting the reality that one candidate lost and another one won. Slinging mud and lies and twisting facts and fiction during the campaign is another sign.
I don’t miss the point, Mike. You don’t understand how your tactics are just as vile as the republicans you acuse of used unbecoming tactics. Let it go. Gore lost in a close, but otherwise fair election. I don’t thinkyou’d be still be screaming about Gore’s unfair win if he were to have squeaked through under the same curcumstances.
Gore was my choice, but I was willing and eager to support Bush the first time around. He royally screwed a lot of stuff up, and probably will continue in his past ways, but he won a second time in an equally fair though flawed election. Yes, there were problems both times, but not letting it go and continuing to point fingers at the other side isn’t going to fix any of those problems, yet that’s about all I see you doing, which is why I may seem to be attacking your integrity. No, I fully understand your point and I think it’s a bunch of hogwash to keep banging away at it. I love out two party system and absolutely hate partisan politics. If you think we are a divided country now just what do you think it would be like if everyone had your unbending attitude but with differing political views? Regardless, there is just as much muck flying from both sides.
You attitude is no better than claiming, “but the volume goes to eleven.”
Oh…my…god. The election’s over, the republicans won, quitcherbitchin until 2008, Mike. Please note: I don’t condone the republicans, I don’t condone the democrats, I don’t condone ANY politician - they’re ALL crooked slimeballs regardless of party affiliation, imho. I also don’t see the point in flogging a dead horse.
It’s over…breathe…relax. 2008 will be here before you know it and then you can ride the democratic bandwagon all you want.
<SLAP!>
Phoo - your arguments are almost funny. If you don’t think that we live in a divided nation right now then you’ve been living in Ecotopia for too long. There’s a world of difference between Kerry/Bush and Gore/Bush. We are as divided a nation as I’ve ever seen. Even my strongest opponents agree with me on this.
Using your points, I suppose that you’ll try to tell me that there was no difference between the governatorial candidates in WA, and that explains the close election.
Can you prove that the FL election was fair? Where do you get the basis for all your claims? Where were you when the Republicans were repeating their 2000 mantra about counting the votes? Where were you when they sent aid’s and staff members to try to storm into that county office? That scene made national news & made it look like the county was trying to kick them out, as citizens of FL when they were Republican aides. Where we you when the Supreme Court made that crazy decision, using equal protection clause, to stop the voting in FL? If you think that decision wasn’t politically motivated then you’re dreaming my friend. I’ve read all about what the Republicans did in FL and it sucked!
If you want to argue with me just for the sake of arguing, that’s OK, because that’s all you appear to be doing!
I’ll stand by my original position, Republicans tried to stop the re-count in WA because they don’t want the votes to be counted. It’s an old strategy they’ve perfected. They protested & protested, but the Democrats finally won in court. Then when they lost, they tried to call for a new election.
If WA was so together & not divided, then you would have had a new governor weeks ago. You still don’t have a governor even though she’s been certified.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| You don’t understand how your tactics are just as vile as the republicans you acuse of used unbecoming tactics. |
What you fail to see & understand are my so-called “tactics” are a reaction to the right-wing smear machine that’s been talking about the WA election all last week. What I am saying is a reaction to this crap & lies. The purpose of my original post was to counter this. If you don’t pay attention to right-wing spin, that’s not my problem.
Mr Soul
Divided Nation? So does this mean Civil War Again?
Red against Blue?
Where is my Musket.
Phoo - your arguments are almost funny. If you don't think that we live in a divided nation right now then you've been living in Ecotopia for too long.
I never said we weren't living in a divided nation. I said a close election doesn't prove the nation is divided. I did say that attitudes like yours is why we are divided. You read too much into a lot of what you read and hear. I don't have clue what was reported about the WA election in California, but I know what was reported in Georgia, a great republican stronghold, and it was acurate. Maybe in a heavily democratic stronghold like California they can't get their facts straight. Maybe they are intent on making something out of nothing in your part of the world.
Yes, there are huge differences in Gregoire and Rossi. Lot's of liberal democrats voted for Rossi. That should tell you something about Gregroire AND Rossi.
Can you prove that the FL election was fair?
I don't live in Flodida so I don't know if any hanky panky was going on for real. Can you prove it was? In the sense that it was as fair as the Florida state laws and courts (both state and federal) said it was fair, is WAS fair. That's the way our system works and each state is a little different. If you don't like the fairness, or lack of fairness, of the Florida system then you should move there and work to get it changed. Belly-aching from California doesn't do anything to solve the problem. I'm not happy Bush won - either time - but until the system is changed I don't think there's much to complain about and I'm not so sure there is anything to change except to make sure misakes are held to a minimum. That isn't easy, but don't blame the system.
If you don't pay attention to right-wing spin, that's not my problem.
Why are you complaining that I don't listen to lies? I don't pay attention to any spin. Spin is spin. Paying attention to spin is a great divider. It takes some effort but it's well worth it. I sleep well most nights.
AND....
YAHOOOO!!! A good slappin' at last! It's about time! Long time no see!
I never said we weren't living in a divided nation. I said a close election doesn't prove the nation is divided. I did say that attitudes like yours is why we are divided. You read too much into a lot of what you read and hear. I don't have clue what was reported about the WA election in California, but I know what was reported in Georgia, a great republican stronghold, and it was acurate. Maybe in a heavily democratic stronghold like California they can't get their facts straight. Maybe they are intent on making something out of nothing in your part of the world.
Yes, there are huge differences in Gregoire and Rossi. Lot's of liberal democrats voted for Rossi. That should tell you something about Gregroire AND Rossi.
Can you prove that the FL election was fair?
I don't live in Flodida so I don't know if any hanky panky was going on for real. Can you prove it was? In the sense that it was as fair as the Florida state laws and courts (both state and federal) said it was fair, is WAS fair. That's the way our system works and each state is a little different. If you don't like the fairness, or lack of fairness, of the Florida system then you should move there and work to get it changed. Belly-aching from California doesn't do anything to solve the problem. I'm not happy Bush won - either time - but until the system is changed I don't think there's much to complain about and I'm not so sure there is anything to change except to make sure misakes are held to a minimum. That isn't easy, but don't blame the system.
If you don't pay attention to right-wing spin, that's not my problem.
Why are you complaining that I don't listen to lies? I don't pay attention to any spin. Spin is spin. Paying attention to spin is a great divider. It takes some effort but it's well worth it. I sleep well most nights.
AND....
YAHOOOO!!! A good slappin' at last!
It's about time! Long time no see!
I get many of my “facts” from msnbc.com - a company that’s closely associated with you I believe. Hence the original post I made. Why don’t you just stick to commenting on that article, instead of baselessly attacking me?
As Pete often says, I’m not going to do your homework for you. You’ll have to find out exactly what the Republicans did in FL if you’re interested, but I’m telling you that I followed it & researched it.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| I never said we weren’t living in a divided nation. I said a close election doesn’t prove the nation is divided. I did say that attitudes like yours is why we are divided. |
Well then just what are you saying??? Take a stand on something, instead of playing the fence like you always do!!! Do you do that because you have a Republican wife & are afraid of offending her or something?
Of course, the election, by itself, doesn’t prove anything. But if you’re going to refute & challenge everything I say, then you’d better have something explanation of your own. Yet, you seem to offer none.
If you choose to believe that the country not divided, then that’s your own business.
Why do you bring where I live into this argument - it’s completely irrelevant to this discussion?
Once again, you & I share similar politics but you quibble over my statements & attack me. Why don’t you fight the Republicans that tried to undermine your election system, instead of a harmless observer like me? Why don’t you support your new Democratic governor.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Divided Nation? So does this mean Civil War Again? |
Take a look at the map of the old confederacy & the recent electoral map. Tell me if you see any comparisons?
Mr Soul
Mike haven’t you figured out yet that I like pushing your button because you are such an easy target? I don’t give a crap about this argument any more than the first two yawns.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Well then just what are you saying??? |
I shall quote myself:
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| …attitudes like yours is why we are divided. |
(Lovely grammar)
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Take a stand on something, instead of playing the fence like you always do!!! |
Exactly what’s wrong with a stand that isn’t far left or far right – isn’t extreme? Seems like I am taking a stand but it’s not to your liking.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| …But if you’re going to refute & challenge everything I say… |
I shall quote myself again:
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Mike haven’t you figured out yet that I like pushing your button because you are such an easy target? I don’t give a crap about this argument any more than the first to yawns. |
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Once again, you & I share similar politics but you quibble over my statements & attack me. |
Because you don’t have a clue about much of what you say. You’re a parrot for the far left and I’m not that far left. You’re just as much a sheep as the Rushies, except in the other direction.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Why don’t you fight the Republicans that tried to undermine your election system, instead of a harmless observer like me? |
Because they didn’t do that. They are using the system the way it was intended to be used.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Why don’t you support your new Democratic governor. |
Where did I say I didn’t support Gregoire now that she’s been elected? But, why should I vote someone that I think is the wrong person for they job? She was elected, therefore I will support her once she takes office. I can’t vote for someone just because they are of a certain party, and I rarely vote against anyone for the same reason. I vote for the person I think is right for the job regardless of party. What’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with being non-partisan? What’s wrong with not being a party sheep?
I’m registered as no party affiliations. That’s the stand I take and the way it’s been since 1972.