Simple Majority Approaching Tie Ahead

UPDATE: The latest numbers show the simple majority question is ahead.

It was pointed out in comment on this thread, but while it’s easy to suggest nefariousness on the the count of King County elections officials, even one of the 2004 election’s biggest critics is saying there doesn’t appear to be that kind of alleged chicanery this time around.

As of right now, 5:14 p.m. on Monday, our top story planned for Tuesday is this one, that the simple majority standard for school levies might actually pass.

Late Wednesday the “no” side on the simple majority question had 51.7 percent of the vote. As of right now they have 50.1 percent, with 178,000 ballots still left to count. Of those, 60,000 are from King County, where the measure has more than 58 percent support.

13 thoughts on “Simple Majority Approaching Tie Ahead

  1. Is it a coincidence that King County elections always raise questions and it is the only county that has a politically appointed director of elections? The rest of the counties elect that person.

  2. Tin foil hat time!

    Give it a break, guys. Eric Earling on Sound Politics says it best: “Be grumpy about 4204 if it passes if you want, though a number of Republicans won’t lost much sleep. But don’t embarrass your fellow conservatives by running to the nearest grassy knoll when you don’t like the results of a campaign that appears to have accomplished its goals, which is being reflected in our tedious way of counting ballots in a largely mail-in election.”



    King County just passed I-25, to elect their own elections official. I suspect it has more to do with the number of ballots in King County than the elections official this time.

  3. If this amendment isn’t approved by a wide margin, it will raise a question, but not one involving skulduggery in elections offices.

    I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard it said that approving this amendment by a simple majority is somehow “confusing” (Robert Mak, most recently) or in some other way contradictory or ironic.

    The “super majority” required to amend our state’s constitution must be achieved in each house of the legislature. It has to be approved by two-thirds of the members in each house — which is even greater than the 60 percent approval needed now for excess levies.

    Having met this super majority requirement, the amendment must still gain the approval of voters. Why should voter approval also be a super majority? Didn’t voters already get their chance to choose legislators who would or would not be members of the “super majority” in the legislature?

    Isn’t one “super majority” requirement for amending the state constitution enough?

    There is nothing ironic, contradictory, or confusing about it.

    If the voters, having elected enough legislators who promised to put this amendment on the ballot, then turn around and reject the amendment, this question arises:

    What the dickens were you thinking when you elected all those legislators?

  4. Gary J,

    There was no fraud in King County in the last governor’s election. The Republican Party’s own hand-picked judge threw every single one of their allegations out of court.

    According to the Secretary of State, the discrepancy rate (the difference between the original tally and the final hand-count tally) was actually LOWER in King County than in EIGHT other counties, Gary.

    Why do you keep on repeating things that are proven to be false?

  5. Gross incompetence and bad management by Dean Logan…yes. Even he is on record saying:

    “In depositions before the trial, Logan said he does not know whether the King County election results were accurate within 129 votes”.

    Sorry Elliott, there is always going to be a question mark associated with that election thanks to Mr. Logan.

  6. Elliott — Your statement, “There was no fraud in King County in the last election” should be rewritten.

    Suggesting fraud was not proven or discovered is one thing. Asserting fraud did not take place is another.

    Look up, “Greater weight of the evidence” and “finding of innocence versus finding of guilt.” Big differences.

    The Republican Party did not “hand pick” the judge. Judges are selected by various rotation methods established by judges and court administrators.

    Try to stick with facts when making your arguments.

  7. Elliott: The election fraud in King County was not disproven. There was not enough admissable evidence to prove fraud. Any reasonable person (this may not include you) who looks at all of the evidence collected must conclude that there was a great deal of fraud in King County.

  8. I think we need to give the result of the vote on 4204 a little prspective. Voters in Kitsap County did NOT vote to approve 4204. I suspect that the voters in South Kitsap County and the South Kitsap School District did NOT vote to approve 4204. When the final breakdown is in we might find that neither Central or North Kitsap School District residents voted to approve.
    At the end of the day King County/Seattle dragged this measure over the line, once again letting us all know where the power resides on any kind of state measure. King County/Seattle has the residents/voters, the economic muscle, legislative majorities and political clout to work its will on the rest of us and, rightly or wrongly, there is little we can do about it.
    I trust that local school boards will, upon sober reflection, realize that with this seeming victory they should move with great caution because that strong anti-tax sentiment has not gone away and this result may have exacerbated it. Any future levy/bond measures wll be voted on by our local electorate and there will be no I-5 corridor contingent to carry the water.
    With 4204 unable to meet even the lower threshold of 50% + 1 vote in Kitsap County it begs the question; can a levy vote in a local district meet even this lower criteria?

  9. Gary, the notion that election fraud was “not disproven” of course applies to virtually every county in our state.

    Election fraud was “not disproven” everywhere.

    “Not enough admissible evidence to prove fraud”. I think that is factual.

    Any reasonable person would presumably look at evidence that meets the standard of being admissable in court – wouldn’t evidence that fails to meet that standard be perhaps suspect?

    Fraud was tested in court.

    Why would a reasonable person conclude the opposite?

  10. Gary J,
    What about the eight other counties with higher discrepancy rates than King County? Was that also fraud?

    Dick Davis,

    King County/Seattle dragged this measure over the line

    Counties don’t vote – individual citizens do. King County didn’t pass this measure. The voters did.

  11. I am happy to hear that King County is shedding some of it’s politics with the passage of I-25.

    I have no doubt shenanigans are pulled by political parties for their best interests, over the interests of the people. Our primary system is a prime example of how much they care. Fraud is a harsh word and difficult to prove.

    The governor’s election was so close, human error could account for any differences one way or the other. I think when state elections get within 500 or so votes they should just flip a coin so we won’t have to listen to parties charging each other.

    I’m glad to hear positive things about vote counting in King County.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Before you post, please complete the prompt below.

Please enter the word MILK here: