Croker Sack

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." — Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956)

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Possible torpedo sighted off the port bow

There’s an interesting part on page 4 of “WSDCC’s Opposition to Petitioners’ Motion to Strike WSDCC’s Rebuttal Witness List” dated May 17.

It appears that the Democrats may call witnesses who will say for whom they cast their votes:

Next, Petitioners take issue with two classes of rebuttal witnesses who are Washington voters who may testify regarding, among other issues, “for whom they cast their ballot.” Motion at 2-3. WSDCC understands that Petitioners will offer expert evidence that voters in certain counties and precincts were more likely to have cast ballots for Dino Rossi than for Christine Gregoire in the 2004 Gubernatorial Election. (sic – Did they mean to say “more likely to have cast ballots for Christine Gregoire”?) These rebuttal witnesses may be offered to rebut Petitioners’ theory that precinct-based proportionate reduction is sufficient proof of for whom individual voters voted in the gubernatorial election. By testifying regarding their voting precinct and for whom they voted, these witnesses may directly rebut Petitioners’ theory of proportional reduction.

Have the Democrats located a few voters who were disqualified from voting and who will say for which candidate they claim to have voted?

That’s an interesting way to attack “proportional reduction.” Pick some precincts with few such voters and see if you can find the ones who will say they voted for Rossi.

The petitioners are trying to avoid calling hundreds of such witnesses in an effort to show how the disqualified voters actually cast their votes. The Democrats may get a lot of mileage out of a handful of them.


Post a Comment

<< Home