Rossi wins in WA state recount by 42 votes

Just heard on local news. I'm sick.

Period.

what kind of remark is that?

Rossi only won by 42 votes. You don't run anything lousy and get that close.

I voted for her, but the fact is that she didn't do a very good job of campaigning.

Honestly in a state where the dems actually picked up seats in our state house, she should have trounced that fake Rossi.

I barely saw Gregoire campaign.

What was the perception she was fighting?

Which is heavily republican, to be sure, but not acknowledging Eastern Washington was hardly smart.

And yet you know she ran a lousy campaign. :eyes: Typical. Exactly what I was talking about.

I mean she was only running for Governor of ALL OF WASHINGTON.

Don't you presume to take me for task for living in Washington and noting that she basically didn't bother to even try to campaign in the second largest population in Washington.

This race should have been heavily tilted in her favor to begin with.

Perhaps you could turn the tables and show me how she ran an effective campaign?

What does it say to you that as a democrat about the only thing I can tell you about Gregoire is that is she isn't a republican and that's basically the campaign she ran "Vote for Me! I'm not a republican!".

I am one of those people who actually pays attention to politics and if I can't tell you much about Gregoire, then what does that say about her campaign in general?

She actually put some effort into this area, which is more than Gregoire did. And Murray was facing the same area that voted for that fool Nethercutt.

This should have been a comfortable win for us and it wasn't. The fact that it even got this close speaks volumes about the Gregoire campaign.

This isn't Texas for Christ's sake that has had a democratic governor for 20 years.

she was ONLY 42 votes behind. And that's with running a so-called lousy camapaign.

To be ONLY 42 votes begind shows she campaign her heart out, and that Rossi sat on his ass.

Anyways when the hand recount is done, we'll see what the number of votes actually is.

I've heard too many people make too many wild claims about various campaigns. They say things weren't done when the truth is they never bothered to find out what was and wasn't done. Did you get your information in your local right wing newspaper? Then make your judgment based on their reporting? Or did you read the pundits that can do literally anything better than the candidate? Or did you listen to the left wing, was she not ranting and raving against the machine enough? If you can't articulate anything more than "lackluster campaign", you didn't really pay attention.

I gave my opinion of her lack of campaigning on the east side of Washington and her very passive campaign in general (which it was).

The streets here in Eastern Washington were littered with signs of the other races campaigning.

I don't even recall a single commercial for Gregoire on the radio or tv.

Why are you so hellbent on defending her campaign?

You have no idea what her campaign consisted of. You have no idea of what Rossi's campaign consisted of. You don't know what the voters voted on. Nothing. Signs and commercials are not the whole of a campaign. I'm sick of people making these accusations when they didn't do any more to become informed about the campaigns than the right wingers who voted the Republicans into office.

You never did answer my question by the way.

Do you live in Washington state?

Can you tell me about her campaign?

If not, then don't presume to lecture me on what I saw as person who actually voted for her in Washington.

There is absolutely no reason for you to take me to task for giving my impressions of what I ACTUALLY WITNESSED as a politically active person in Washington.

I WASN'T VOTING. YOU WERE. It's YOUR state. Why the hell can't you say something besides "lackluster campaign"????? If it was a candidate in MY state and I were bitching, I'd have something more to say than "lackluster campaign". If that's the best I could come up with, I'd know *I* hadn't done my part in being informed or informing the people in my area.

....that I can barely tell you anything about her? That's because she wasn't out there campaigning and selling her ideas to the public.

Why won't you factor that into your logic?

The ONLY thing I even remotely remember about her campaign is that she said she would bring 250000 new jobs to Washington (although she never really said how).

She was a candidate who got beat in a heavily democratic state by not running an effective campaign.

Why is that so difficult to accept? Because it was a close race?

The fact is that it shouldn't have even been a close race. She should have a ran away with it.

That's a fact. Her loss (and ours for that matter) can be directly attributed to the fact that she didn't really campaign very hard, particularly in Eastern Washington.

Yet you are defending her because, well, it was close and therefore she MUST have run a decent campaign. That logic doesn't hold true because she should have EASILY won this race.

So how did she lose? She lost because she FAILED to get her message to the people who she needed to vote for her.

And I am wrong to point that out?

Until Democrats understand they cannot depend on the media to spoon feed them information on Democratic candidates, we'll never win another election again.

Personally, I think you are defending someone who ran a pretty lazy campaign simply because she is a democrat.

I think that not looking at where she went wrong and how she lost in a race she should have easily won is a mistake of the highest order and I refuse to sit back and say "well, we did our best in this race" when in actually we did nothing of the sort.

From where I stand, making assumptions that because this was a close race she must have ran a really great campaign is a sure way to continue losing.

We lost because her campaign wasn't effective. Pure and simple.

If you don't agree, that's fine with me. I can only tell you what I saw myself with my lying eyes and ears.

If this were Alabama, then I would probably agree with you that Gregoire ran a great campaign to get so close. The political landscape here was tilted heavily in Gregoire's favor and she lost while other democrats gained in this state.

That speaks volumes about her campaign. Either that or Rossi really isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread and I refuse to believe that.

What was the perception that Rossi painted of Gregoire? All these answers and you've given me no details of the campaign that was run between the two of them.

I didn't even pay attention to my local race, but if DeFazio hadn't won, I could tell you why. They tried to expose him as the liberal that he really is. I got that in about 2 TV ads. They couldn't do it. But if they had, I'd know why he lost. I can't understand why a person who paid close attention has nothing to say except "lackluster campaign". I've said absolutely nothing supportive of Gregoire or the Democratic Party, which you totally missed. Says volumes about the rest of the problem in our party.

...and it was time for a change and couple of other things about how the economy was in a shambles (which of course had nothing to do with Tim Eyman and his citizen initiatives that have basically gutted the state's tax base and the major outsourcing going on by technical companies).

There were a few other things, but all in all, I never really heard much of anything from Gregoire. Like I said, I recall one promise to bring 250000 new jobs to Washington, but that's about it.

She didn't show she really had a fire in her belly. If someone isn't willing to put themselves DURING the campaign for the job, why would anyone believe that she would after the fact.

Even Patty Murray, who was fairly safe in her senate seat ran regular commercials and answered the charges about that speech she made about Osama bin Laden (I heard her radio and tv spots constantly). She didn't win Eastern Washington, but still, she put forth the effort and won by a substansial margin against the republicans golden boy Nethercutt.

and 20 years of Democrats. That was the campaign?

Not. And it wouldn't do any good if I ran through an entire rerun of both parties campaigns anyway.

You are determined I am the bad guy because I had the audacity to criticise what I saw as a lackluster campaign by Gregroire in the state in which I live.

I am pretty much sick of discussing the issue with you anyway since you are determined that I must be making an unwarranted criticism of Gregoire's campaign (or lack thereof from my viewpoint), so we'll just agree than no democratic candidate could possibly run an ineffective campaign (cough-LIEBERMAN-cough) and leave you happy in knowing that you are absolutely right in this.

Maybe that's the difference I'm looking for. Once again, never said anything about Gregoire's campaign. But you haven't given an intelligent critique yet. "lackluster campaign" and "fire in the belly" are platitudes that just don't mean a thing to me.

I am a WA native and resident, and I think Gregoire ran a very effective campaign against Sims in the primary. Gregoire was everywhere, pre-primary: debating Sims in public forums and hammering Sims on his dreamy go-nowhere schemes and ridiculously bloated income tax plan. This is probably because Sims popularity, as King County Executive for Life, was a genuine threat.

But post-primary (and this is one of the reasons I think the primary should be earlier in the year, to give candidates some fundraising/campaigning time before the general election) Gregoire sputtered. She was forced into defending herself, rather weakly, against that tired, old missed-filing-deadline bungle. Never mind that she wasn't the one in her office who actually missed the filing deadline; she got to take the heat for it. She spent the entire two months playing defense against that single issue. I agree that you never saw her cohesive plans. Even her attack ads against Rossi weren't all that 'n' a bag of chips (there was a lot of nasty crap she could have used against Rossi that I would have, had I been her ad manager. Rossi's basic M/O is that he's a hired gun for business and industry whose salary we'd get to pick up. I think that would have been a very compelling point, in a state where unemployment is still above the national average, and there's a very strong core pro-environment voting bloc.)

It was almost as though she just wrote us off.

While it is unlikely she would have won E. Washington, if you want us to vote for you as our governor at least make an attempt to include bring us into the fold.

Gees.........all this negativity is ridiculous.

...with a guy whose voice literally sounded like it came from the bowels of Hell itself, accusing Christine Gregoire of just about everything short of being an ax murderer.

And Liberal Veteran has a point. She didn't fight back very hard at all. Rossi is a Chimpy clone who even named his dog Dubya and is rumored to play with Anndrew Coulter dolls. Like his false messiah, his campaign image is miles to the left of his record and his intentions for this state :scared:

Now that tells me something. Did she not fight back because she thought the people of Washington were smart enough that she didn't need to dive in the political manure? And how much money did she have compared to Patty Murray?

Just to bad... to think if 43 more people would of just got their lazy asses to the poll that day...grrr...

Somebody loses by 40 votes and you're going to get on your high horse and criticze the campaign??? THAT is why we lose. What is it about the Democratic Party that makes people so smug that they think they have to look down their nose and criticize every move a candidate makes.

:argh:

The fact it was even this close when the dems actually GAINED seats in the state legislature is evidence of that.

This was Gregoires race to lose and she did by running a lackluster campaign.

If you don't like my opinion, that's fine, but I stand by it that she should have won easily.

Gregoire was a weak candidate to begin with and she ran a VERY weak campaign.

She still should have won over that corporate whore Rossi. The whole 2004 Gubernatorial capaign in Washington reminds me too much of the 2000 Presidential election...

A vacuous, faux-moderate, Republican who is regarded as "likeable" beats a somewhat weak Democrat who ran a lackluster campaign. With a razor thin margin and a recount that the republican side tried to stop.

It does sound familiar.

You're correct, Liberal Veteran. It's been a long time since we have had a Republican governor. The fact that it was this close is ample proof that she didn't run a good campaign.

I know a lot of people feel like they need to make a knee-jerk defense of the dem, but Gregoire doesn't really deserve it because she didn't run a good campaign at all.

QED.

Now get some vicious licks in on her yourself, and kick Kerry, and for that matter, Gore, a few times while you're at it.

Your logic sucks. In a state where dems actually made gains and we have had a democratic governor for 20 years, there is no reason she should have lost. Your logic is that because I criticise her campaign and it was a close race, I must be in the wrong.

If we cannot acknowledge when our candidate didn't run a decent campaign and learn from that, then we should just hang it up now.

Using your logic if we lost in a heavily democratic area in a race that should have been heavily tilted in her direction and you believe she still ran a great campaign, then we might as just change our country's name to Republicanland because it's obvious we are therefore a minority opinion that doesn't even resonate with democrats.

But I will now.

She lost a statewide campaign. The legislature campaigns are not statewide -- they are a bunch of local campaigns. So it is possible that the results of the legislature races didn't actually represent statewide sentiment, but rather, superior Democratic organization at the local levels, or issues that caused people to vote one way locally and another statewide, or people wanted a split government, or it was the result of gerrymandering. Hell, it's possible people simply didn't like the woman, and it had little to do with her campaign.

Personally, I don't know a thing about her campaign. Maybe she ran a bad campaign, maybe not. But I know bad reasoning when I see it. If we're going to criticize candidates, it's best to do so for reasons that hold together. The argument, "She lost, the congressional Democrats won, therefore she ran a bad campaign" doesn't hold together.

...against Nethercutt.

Again, her campaign was not at all energetic and barely visible. That was her failing. She lost in counties that should have been a slam dunk for her.

as opposed to proof. But...

Patty Murray was the incumbent, so it's an unequal comparison. Perhaps people were looking for different things from their senator than from their governor. Perhaps Patty Murray ran a better campaign than did Gregoire, but Gregoire still ran a good campaign.

Who can say?

Anyway, my original comment was more aimed at the general, "Democrats suck!" attitude here than anything else.

But I think it is incumbent on us to look at our losses and try to figure out why we lost races we should have won fairly easily.

...you much of anything about Gregoire, what does that tell you about her campaign? If as someone who pays attention barely noted a campaign from Gregoire, what fucking chance does the average person have?

Do you live here in Washington?

Get off your high horse and explain to me how this woman who should have won by a more than comfortable margin in a blue state that actually gained democratic seats in our state legislature ran such an effective campaign.

I have no tolerance for your knee-jerk defense of Gregoire's lackluster campaign simply because she is a democrat.

We lose elections because people run lackluster campaigns, too.

But I agree that the campaign just kind of sat back on their lollies and didn't put her out there enough.

She lost Snohomish County for God Sake----That should have been a slam dunk for her.

All people got about her was the "scandal that blamed her for a million dollar loss in the Attorney General's office". No one heard about her terrific track record and the millions of dollars she won for all the states in the tobacco law suit.

Every corner had a Rossi sign up. Very few Gregoire signs.

They sat back because they expected to win over idiot boy Rossi and didn't put up a fight.

....she ran a lackluster campaign.

It's like a champion boxer just standing there and letting themselves be beaten up and never actually boxing and then pointing out that the previous champ lost because he didn't do a good job of what he was supposed to do.

Save your frustration for when the Dem's roll over on this one too.

Sorry folks it just seems to me sometimes the folks who are in charge of the party act like a bunch of wussies. I've been a Democrat all my life and come from good Union stock but I'm just totally frustrated with our leaders.

(Can anyone tell me what a wussie is anyway---It actually sounds kinda cute?)

She should have won by the margin that Murray trounced Nethercutt with. But she ran a bad campaign while that asshole Rossi ran a good one, and fooled everyone into thinking that he was a moderate.

I'm just so sick about this.

...but I won't agree that Gregoire ran a bad one.

She was visible. This July, in my little town in SW washington (Montesano, population 3300) she participated in the local festival parade - I even got to shake her hand and wish her luck.

Hopefully after the hand recount, it will prove to be enough.

Rossi did not write off any part of the state, he campaigned hard in traditionally Democrat rural parts of Western Washington. Gregoire just barely beat Rossi in this county, one in which the local republican party can be charitably described as dysfunctional.

Gregoire's principal problem, in my view, was in playing it safe. It was very easy for Rossi to paint her as an insider. This was complicated by her vigorous challenge from Ron Sims, a candidate who lost bad, but who cannot be called timid, and in my view had the right policy answers.

Playing it safe was enough to beat Sims. I don't know that it was enough to beat Rossi.

In fairness, despite my lifelong status as a Democrat, we haven't been burned yet by a really bad Republican governor. Spellman and Evans were actually pretty good governors.

I want Gregoire to win, but I don't feel the same way about this loss (if it holds) as I did about the presidential race. It was important that Kerry win. It seems to me that it's just better if Gregoire wins.

Neither candidate would have fixed the most glaring problem we face, we have the most regressive tax system in the country. (paradoxically, it's also just about the least business-friendly one too)

As if I wasn't depressed enough today.

wow talk about close.

the Reps say they should "do the decent thing, the honorable thing and concede, instead of dragging this into the Christmas season with the state not knowing who the governor is."

:eyes: X 1,000,000

"Decent and honorable thing" as they admit to planning their own recount request if Rossi had fallen behind.

neato:argh:

It was my understanding that there would be a hand recount now that the final margin has dropped below 150. Maybe I got some bad info but when recount started the Wa. Sec. of State considered this to be "two count" process and he's a Republican.

Since it was closer than 2000 vote differential, now that rossi has come out 42 votes ahead in that recount, the only "decent and honorable" thing for the democrats to do is to concede...

:eyes:

A hand recount, conducted under intense bipartisan scrutiny, may give Gregoire the election.

It's not over yet!

We should count them by hand to begin with, at the Precinct, on video tape, with representatives from each candidate present. It would take a huge conspiracy to fix the vote then.

#1, she renamed herself "Chris" once she'd won the primary. Ms. Gregoire, everyone knew you as "Christine" already. you were branded. go with it.

#2, the National GOP POURED money into Rossi's campaign, painting him as a moderate, gee-what-a-great-suburban-blue-button-down guy. I saw NOTHING to counter that.

If you win King, Snohomish, and Pierce, you've got the state. She didn't. Now we get to live with it. I just pray Rossi is as ineffective as Locke has been.