Huckabee Challenging Washington Vote
It's Unseemly When Republicans Act Like Democrats
By California Yankee Posted in 2008 | Mike Huckabee | Washington Caucuses — Comments (97) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Mike Huckabee is challenging the results of the Washington State Caucuses:
The Huckabee campaign claims the state chairman declared McCain the winner before all the votes were counted:
Campaign Chairman Ed Rollins told reporters Sunday that in addition to delegates, the “dubious” announcement hurt Huckabee’s momentum after surprise wins in Kansas and Louisiana Saturday night.[. . .]
Rollins said he was not accusing the McCain campaign of anything, but said Washington Republican State Party Chairman Luke Esser suspended voting with only 87 percent of the votes counted, and then issued a press release declaring McCain the victor. When Huckabee campaign officials reached Esser Sunday, he said the rest of the votes would be counted today and refused requests for the campaign to monitor the tallying, Rollins said, adding Esser said the campaign should trust the party.
“At this point of time, I want to make sure that every vote is counted, and I’m not accusing anyone of mischief at this time; I’m accusing someone of bad judgment,” he said.
[. . .]Rollins added the dubious counting hurt the perception of their wins Saturday.
"There's a big difference in impact between our campaign winning three primaries and caucuses yesterday as we go into one, the way reporting would have been done, as opposed to two wins and one loss, and one loss which we are now certainly questioning," he said.
CNN reports the difference between McCain and Huckabee as 242 votes, with 87% of the vote reported.
Even if Rollins is right, I can't help but think that the Huckabee campaign is acting like the Sore/Loserman campaign in Florida, circa 2000.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | On Yesterday's Electoral Contests — Comments (3) »
Huckabee Challenging Washington Vote 97 Comments (0 topical, 97 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
That's also why GWB was a huge sore loser when he appealed the Florida Supreme Court's ruling in 2000.
OH WAIT.
He wasn't a sore loserman because the Florida Supreme Court decision was a terrible decision.
Just like lots of other bad decisions people make, often because of political loyalties or just human error.
Give Huckabee a break guys.
in the first place. It wasn't the province of the Florida supreme court and thats what SCOTUS sent back to them.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Bad decisions get made all the time, i.e. the Florida Supreme Court.
Challenging them doesn't make anyone a sore loser.
And I'd hope we wouldn't be afraid to make that argument if there were obvious irregularities caused by Democrats this November.
Oh, 20,000 fake votes were counted in Ohio, tipping the electoral college to Obama or Clinton.
Should we challenge the fake votes? Or should we be afraid of looking like sore losermans?
We have had the precedent that this type of antics were the province of the Democrat party. At the very least all other options should have been exhausted first.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
"We have had the precedent that this type of antics were the province of the Democrat party."
That would be in the special fantasy world in which you live, I guess. I've been around a while and this sounds like the antics of a political party, not any one political party. Every time I read this kind of hyper-partisan nonsense on Red State, I shake my head. I think partisanship is great, until it begins to crowd out the ability to reason.
And no I'm not going to go back over the last forty or fifty years to provide links to a reality that you would probably just ignore anyway. The information on Republican corruption, electoral irregularities, and plain old sleaziness is readily available to anyone who's interested. As is the same for Democrats.
As a Red State commenter wrote just the other day: "I find both parties are corrupt to the core."
The writer is a self-described partisan Republican, but apparently he's been paying attention and isn't letting his preferences cloud his thinking.
The fact is that too much partisanship makes people stupid. Sincere, intelligent people say and do things that are ridiculous. That is what characterizes the various "derangement syndromes." There are valid reasons to dislike, even hate, George Bush and/or Bill Clinton. But too much of the discussion takes place in a bathtub full of Kool-Aid. I'm afraid I think claiming that "this type of antics [are] the province of the Democrats" is an example of that phenomenon. And believing this kind of nonsense weakens the Republican Party, because it prevents the kind of critical self-examination that leads to improvement and renewal.
The republican party in recent history has been able to club the democratic party over the head with this issue. Huckabee's move tends to remove our ability to do that.
Understand ?
As to being hyperpartisan I suppose in your world that's just a synonym for caring.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Wow, your point is so deep I simply couldn't comprehend it.
Of course, it's also wrong. Flat wrong. If Huckabee had never been born, let alone challenged this action, the Republican Party would still have a long list of irregularities to answer for -- not deep geologic time problems, but misdeeds recent enough to demand the attention of anyone interested in cleaning up electoral politics today -- all elections, all candidates, all parties.
"As to being hyperpartisan I suppose in your world that's just a synonym for caring."
Well, if you'd bothered to read what I wrote (blah, blah, blah). I'm not surprised that you would absurdly equate "hyper-partisanship" with "caring." As I said: silly.
Just to review, I wrote: I think partisanship is great, until it begins to crowd out the ability to reason.
Believing that Republicans had clean hands until Huckabee made his challenge is a fine example of this. Irregularities, as well as appearances of irregularities undermine voter and citizen confidence. Stopping a vote count and announcing a winner under the circumstances in place in Washington was both unnecessary and unwise. It creates a reasonable question about the integrity of the process and outcome. I would never -- never -- vote for Huckabee for president, but I think he was right to file a challenge. (Apparently, I'm not alone here in that belief.)
It's also "silly" to assert that the filing of a challenge is the problem, rather than the actions that caused the challenge. I'm fully prepared to accept that the count was being done fairly and the outcome would have been legitimate.
Which is precisely why declaring a winner (especially in Washington with the 2004 gubernatorial election still fresh in people's minds) was a mistake.
"The republican party in recent history has been able to club the democratic party over the head with this issue."
And my point is that people who live in glass houses can always throw stones if they want to, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be attending to their own issues first (or at least simultaneously). In my world, if you don't see the problem with the Washington decision or with other events and activities in the recent past involving Republicans, you're either not paying attention, you don't care about the truth, or partisanship has shut down your ability to reason. Note: those aren't mutually exclusive.
If the vote count had been handled responsibly, the winner would have been announced after the count had been completed; no extrapolated winner would have been mentioned (by officials); no impropriety would have been suspected; and no challenge filed. Is that so difficult to understand?
Excessive partisanship breeds hypocrisy. Hypocrisy -- whatever its roots -- breeds cynicism, undermines confidence and weakens both individual actors and the systems in which they act.
Congressional poll numbers are so low, not because Democrats are doing a lousy job, but because the American people believe that both parties are doing a lousy job. (I'd have to agree.) Get out of your self-imposed echo chamber for a few minutes: both parties are corrupt, both are not to be trusted, both are hypocritical, both care more about winning than doing the what's best for the country. Both parties are guilty; they both contribute to the erosion of confidence and the declining health of our system.
1. You haven't presented any of these "Misdeeds" that hamper the republican party. Whats more you can't in a national election.
2. The way you use Hyperpartisan obviously indicates you don't see a difference between the parties and feel that those who do are laboring under a form of derangement.
Both of your theses lack merit.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
My full response is too long and the columns have grown too narrow. (I'd be glad to send that to you via email if you'd like.)
The short response is simple. You make my case for me. The difference between us seems to be I can see similarities (between the parties) that exist, while you see differences that don't.
I can see differences too, but they are largely differences of degree (and not always in one party's favor), rather than differences of kind. You on the other hand.... Well, how does one discuss anything in a meaningful way with someone for whom the world is so black and white?
I'm feeling sorry for you, so I'll give you a hint. Think 2002. Think New Hampshire. Think telephones. I hope that helps. There's a lot more, so don't stop there.
As for your contention that I "can't in a national election," of course I can and so could you if you had an ounce (gram?) of objectivity. However, since you're the one who needs to work on your research skills, I'll let you find your own instances of Republican misdeeds. I can see there is no point in my wasting any more of my time on what is almost certainly a hopeless cause.
If you're going to come onto our site and say Republicans have things to account for, you need to provide specifics with documentation, or talk about other things. If you can't be bothered to research your own attacks, don't waste our time.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
So I am incapable of evaluating evidence you haven't presented.
Undoubtedly so.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
But if Huck makes a habit of this, then he might as well forget any shot at the VP slot.
And wherever men are fighting against barbarism, tyranny, and massacre, for freedom, law, and honour, let them remember that the fame of their deeds, even though they may be exterminated, may perhaps be celebrated as long as the world rolls round. ~ Winston Churchill
he's got a shot at getting on the Dem Ticket!
I wouldn't worry about Huck making a habit of challenging contests, he lost by less in MO (1.5%) and didn't challenge, and there was alot more at stake there.
MO results here: http://www.sos.mo.gov/enrweb/statewideresults.asp?eid=203
I support Governor Mike Huckabee for President.
Have you stopped to consider that Huckabee might not be in this for the VP slot but for bigger more important convictions?
I don't believe you'd sit idly by if the shoe were on the other foot. They left 1500 votes left uncounted and they just stopped counting and then they want to go behind closed doors to count the rest....Something stinks and I think I smell Machine Politics.
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
Have you stopped to consider that Huckabee might not be in this for the VP slot but for bigger more important convictions?
The evidence doesn't seem to back up the idea, though. The only convictions that Huckabee seems passionate about are the court convictions he overturns
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
A significant portion of his candidates might as well have been from the Dem side.
In politics, you have your word and your friends; go back on either and you're dead. (Rule #11 of the public policy process)
Huckabee. His ethics and his Huey P. Long rhetoric are made for them. Plus, I'm sure they'll pick up a bunch of current Huck supporters who aren't bright enough to figure out that he won't get anymore accomplished as a D than he would as an R.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Huckabee has enough rhetorical prowess to be a poor man's Obama. Rollins, however, only has enough electoral prowess to get minor roles for candidates. We lose nothing with Rollins, and the D's gain nothing. We lose very little with Huckabee, but the D's might gain a lot, especially since Huckabee could bring evangelicals and pro-lifers to the D fold.
Huckabee's not a lib, but he's not a conservative. He's simply Huckabee. Not supporting the guy, but still.
In politics, you have your word and your friends; go back on either and you're dead. (Rule #11 of the public policy process)
Hey watch the comparisons to the King Fish! Old Huey had style, snappy clothes and loved a good party..
The other feller...not so much.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
a winner with only 85% counted and the margin so slim looks SLEEZY and should be investigated by the RNC.
Huck's not going to win, I don't see why so many are afraid of him. Maybe he can get RINO McCain's attention and John can spend some time reaching out to conservatives instead of reaching out to liberals.
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison
I sound like a broken record, but a man in known by the company he keeps. Rollins..Ross wasn't crazy for firing the guy.
Kate
“It is the American vice, the democratic disease which expresses its tyranny by reducing everything unique to the level of the herd.” Henry Miller
How can you possibly compare the Washington State situation to Florida 2000?
Huck is roughly 200 votes behind McCain with only 87% of the vote tallied?
Why in the world would they stop counting?
If the roles were reversed, and McCain was behind, I'd expect the same reaction from their campaign.
This is a matter of principle. I can understand if the tally was at 98% or 99%. But in this case, it's possible the uncounted votes could impact the final results.
In Huck's Don Quixotic effort to win the nomination, every single state and delegate matters.
And with Washington State's recent gubernatorial election controversy, it is possible there may be something going on behind the scenes.
It may be nothing but we need to find out what's going on.
Mr. Ed
Straight from the Horse's Mouth
Calling a winner when 13% of the votes are outstanding is stupid and un-American.
Quit your whining! Neither should win.
The Big 2 can't get over 50% of the vote? Take you piddling 24% and go home with what you deserve. Nothing.
It's about the integrity of the vote.
If your candidate can't stir up more support than that then you need to pack it in.
We're supposed to be the Law and Order party right? Are you REALLY gonna tell me in your heart of hearts that you don't see what's wrong with abruptly stopping the count at 10:00 or so in the evening with only 1500 ballots to be counted and now they want to go behind closed doors to count the ballots?
Party loyalty or fealty to a candidate is one thing but this is the stuff of Tammany hall and Democrat machine politics!
You don't have to like the candidate or agree with him to see the corruption here. If McCain is so principled he should be saying he doesn't want to win that way!
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
Nobody showed. How do you count nobody?
According to a hucksarmy.com post by someone who spoke with the WA GOP and spoke to a woman there who said "...in a nutshell her answer was that many of the precincts had no votes cast because there was no representation."
If this is true then the whole thing could have been easily avoided by stating those precincts as having 0 votes and delegates and being done with it.
Here's the post: http://forum.hucksarmy.com/viewtopic.php?p=75817#p75817
I support Governor Mike Huckabee for President.
You could probably get the campaigners to at least buy dinner. ;-)
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
There were 1500 ballots not counted. if there were no ballots what would the supposedly be counting today?
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
but it has never stopped me before: Isn't this a tempest in a teapot? I mean, I would assume that the rest of the votes WILL BE counted, right? I mean this isn't like a game of Euchre, where you throw in the cards after someone has their point and the other team shows the stopper.
IF, the remaining votes show a change, then the vote will be reversed, right? Why is it necessary to make a stink -- and make the party look like a bunch of Democrats when the results WILL be known soon?
They want to finish the count without oversite
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
momentum. I hope he steers very carefully.
Nothing will annoy more people more quickly than a transparently fabricated whine-a-thon and stomping away.
This is reminding me of his attack non-commercial that he made and only showed to show how he was not going to make a negative commercial. After he made it.
And of course let us not forget his little one liner about how Jesus and Satan are brothers.
If this stuff becomes a pattern, then he is much less the candidate and man and Christian I have thought him to be.
I wouldn't worry about Huck making a habit of challenging contests, he lost by less in MO (1.5%) and didn't challenge, and there was alot more at stake there.
MO results here: http://www.sos.mo.gov/enrweb/statewideresults.asp?eid=203
I support Governor Mike Huckabee for President.
This looks liek a transprently fabricated whine-a-thon to me and fits in with his "non-showing" of his negative ad and his oneline about whetehr Mormons think Jesus and Satan are brothers.
Hope he continues to overplay his hand and maybe even escalates these types of tactics. Don't think this type of thing will win him a VP slot and anyway, if was nominated for VP, I think it would hurt the GOP.
He needs to win nearly all of the delegates to win this thing. Therefore, he can't do what the Democrats did in New Mexico and basically let it sit.
It's silly to call for an investigation. But no harm in pointing out that you can't win with 87% counted and a small margin.
Of course, if it's true that no one showed up to caucus...yikes.
No one of good character leaves behind a wasted life - John McCain
When the Republicans announced that they were splitting the delegates between the caucuses and the primary, that sounded like a good idea to me.
Now, I'm wondering. Since caucus turnout is normally only a small percentage of eligible voters, doing something to further limit turnout isn't a good idea. Why make an effort to go to a caucus on a Saturday, perhaps disrupting plans or just giving up precious R&R time, when you can vote in the primary? Of course, the perception (justified) that the nomination is McCain's is also likely to lower turnout.
But a caucus where no one shows up? Did that really happen?
[Democrats are also having a primary, but it's just a beauty contest (a waste of time, money, and a potential problem if Clinton were to win while Obama got the majority of delegates).]
But this sounds like he is right. What's wrong with challenging a decision that might rob him and a majority of Republican voters?
On second thought let him keep making a fool of himself.
I've a hard time finding any sound reason for the WA party to prematurely announce like this. Huckabee's right to not only object, but ask to observe.
No, he may not be going anywhere nationally. But let's save the back-room shenanigans for the Democrats.
I attended my Washington State caucus. There was standing room only, much different than previous years. The Ron Paul people were there in force. Everyone was extremely polite. Anyone who stood up, no matter for which candidate, received applause from the entire group. Most people spoke for Paul or for McCain. One person insisted on voting for Romney, and one person supported Huckabee. Perhaps my experience was odd; it may have been an aberrant precinct. In any case, McCain won hands down where I was. It was also nice to be in a room of mature adults for a change. In my district there was me, an undecided, and a Ron Paul supporter. We had a good conversation on the issues. Compared to online forums, it was quite refreshing.
If Rollins is right, then he's nothing like the Gore campaign in 2000.
are awarded at the convention anyway.
the Republicans split delegate selection between the caucuses and the primary. A reasonable compromise with some potential problems, none of which, barring electoral irregularities (whoops!) create a legitimacy problem.
The Democrats chose to award the delegates based on the caucuses and then have a beauty contest primary -- a really stupid idea in my opinion, not to mention being a waste of time and money. Obama seems to have crushed Clinton in the caucuses. Now, what happens if Obama supporters stay home on primary day, while Clinton supporters turn out in large numbers? What if she wins the primary and he gets the delegates? That looks terrible. Who pays these guys to think up this stuff?
I don't understand Washington, they do the caucus and a primary and the delegates go to the convention uncommitted anyway.
Talk about a plan this holds down turnout!
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
and 2% difference between the candidates? And Huck is a sore loser for this? You gotta be kidding me. If this was your favorite candidate behind, I wouldn't imagine this kind of a response.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
OK I understand some view Huckabee as no better than McCain, but this is unacceptable. Saying someone is a poor loser when only 200 votes separate the candidates with 13% left to be counted? This is not even a recount!
If there is foul play, it is probably some party loyalist doing it for the good of the party because we have to get behind the candidate who has won (won without winning a majority of the delegates yet!)
... but the Huckabee folks have a point. If the margin really is as small as 240+ votes calling it for McCain with 87% percent of the precincts counted is just stupid.
Now, it may be that the folks in the state GOP establishment know that most of the remaining 13% is coming from areas where McCain did very well. In that case their prediction might very well be correct. But even then I would think they really should wait until they've got the final numbers in a race this close.
In any event, it appears to be getting straightened out now. There's no need for a controversy. We'll just wait to see what actually happened.
Hang all traitors and secessionists! Hang them high!
- Me
According to Fox news Washington State Party Chairman, Luke Esser will not answer the phone or allow the Huckabee Campaignto oversee the count.
If you believe this is on the up and up I have some ocean front property in Oklahoma to sell you.
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
The price of freedom, . . . courage.
McCain should be INSISTING that this be resolved, so that the integrity of the process remains.
This is more important than any one candidate's vote count, especially because of the vote counting mess in the last WA governor's election.
Important to know:
1. The caucus was held to elect delegates to our county conventions.
2. Presidential delegates get assigned via the feb 19 primary (51%) and elected at the State Convention in May (49%).
3. The numbers that people are challenging and commenting on mean nothing. They are a fun straw poll of delegates elected to our county conventions. It is their presidential preference at this time. The count is not binding or official.
4. The statistics and numbers still hold up for a McCain 'win'... but it is a winner of nothing. This is only a FUN STRAW POLL!
If he cannot keep his cool over a straw poll, that does not speak well of his at all.
"This is only a FUN STRAW POLL!"
We are beginning to understand that. However, last I looked, the media is treating this as a caucus that counts and doesn't bother explaining that it is just a 'fun straw poll'.
Why give a percentage counted at all if it doesn't matter. (87% complete). Why not just say 100% finished.
I believe this is misleading (at best).
Those delegates to the Republican National Convention not chosen in the primary are chosen at the State Convention. But who chooses them? After the precinct caucuses choose delegates to the county conventions, the county conventions choose delegates to the state convention. At each step, the choosing is done by delegates pledged to a particular candidate. So, the final delegates to the national convention will be chosen at each level by people who support one or another candidate.
The Dem situation is simpler because there are only two candidates (and all of the delegates are chosen through the caucus/convention route). Some two thirds of the delegates at the county convention are going to be Obama supporters. They'll vote on delegates to the state convention. Therefore, one would expect that two thirds of those delegates will be Obama supporters. And so on. The last time I checked a "fun straw poll" didn't count in any way toward delegate selection. That isn't true of caucuses.
McCain has this thing in the bag mathematically speaking, but a strong Hukabee surge could energize the evangelical wing of the base. Good. Hukabee may be able to make it onto the ticket. Good. I see nothing wrong with dedicated Republicans working to have a seat at the table.
McCain / Hukabee is fine with me. Chuck Norris can run the Whitehouse gym.
Huck Romney and Paul need 465 delegates combined to put us in an open convention
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
come of that ticket. The landslide defeat would rid us permanently of Huckabee.
Thus the article. Thus the comparision to sore/loserman.
Check here
Note the column that says State Del. not votes. 242 is quite a large number when speaking in those terms.
Fighting for conservatism one day at a time.
I would encourage you to watch this music video on Ronald Reagan http://youtube.com/watch?v=CvxQHxFqkUQ.
So Huck is showing a little backbone. Do some here really find that a bad characteristic in a possible presidential candidate? Frankly, I find it a little refreshing.
And to the FUN STRAW POLL guy, sit back and look around. For Huck to be able to claim a three for three win just after McCain becomes the "presumptive Republican nominee" is a big deal. It gives credibility to his campaign and demonstrates his momentum. That might not garner him a single delegate in Washington State, but it certainly might in other states yet to hold a primary or caucus. It's also a western state where Huck supposedly has no strength. It's all about momentum.
It's still mathematically possible, thought statistically improbable, that Huckabee could win. It's slightly more probable, though still very unlikely, that no candidate has 51% of the delegates prior to the convention (thanks to Mr. Romney's retaining his delegates). Now THAT would make for an interesting convention.
They left 1500 votes uncounted and just stopped and why? How lopng does it take to count 1500 votes? and they want to count them without the campaigns being able to verify the count?
If you can't smell a rat here you need to have your nose checked!
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
All the votes WERE counted in Florida--imagine if they had stopped with Bush ahead by 50,000 votes with 6 percent still to be counted!! That is exactly where we were when Gore first decided to concede and then as the margin shrunk to nothing, he turned around his LIMO and decided to wait it out.
13 percent of votes outstanding??? That's outrageous.
crumbs.
Fernando Caballero
Here's a Latino that will never vote for McCain... Stop dealing in stereotypes and discuss real issues.
before someone looks at the numbers and notices that as far as the people of Washington are concerned they are both only marginally better than that weird guy and the one that already dropped out.
Funny what close pals they were a few days ago, across the country at another caucus in West Virginia. The Washington State chairman probably heard a rumor that Huckabee was going to pay McCain back in his caucus. They were both worth 18 delegates, so it seems logical.
Watch out the Black Helicopters are over your house
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
First, Louisiana held a Caucus, which was won by an unaffiliated ProFamily/ProLife group. Then yesterday a primary, which was won so narrowly by Huckabee it was meaningless. The end result was 47 delegates all uncommitted. Oh, yeah. The Primary cost a cool $5 million. Later we have a state convention where largely unaffiliated state delegates meet to select our 47 uncommitted national delegates. Basically, the state GOP leadership gets to do whatever it wants.
It sounds like Washington has the similar farce, to an extent. My guess is that the State Chair let slip that the party leadership in Washington was going for McCain, even if Huckabee came back and won the fun poll by a percent or two. After all, it wasn't like Huckabee was a clear favorite, say by racking up a whopping third of the total vote or something!
I'm not sure Huckabee winning Washington where Ron Paul got a full 21% of the vote is such a trophy anyway but you have to admit, a fun poll or not it looks really bad!
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
The count should not have been stopped, nor should a winner have been declared. I'm not a huge fan of either Huckabee or McCain, but objectively this does not look good. What's wrong with counting the votes & then declaring a winner?
Nothing is wrong with that. If for no other reason than to destroy any sniff of corruption, COUNT ALL THE VOTES.
"The shadow proves the sunshine" - Switchfoot
Huckabee has obliterated his chances of being POTUS.
"I didn't major in Math, I majored in miracles" Are you kidding me? You majored in miracles! What is going to happen if we have to go to war with Iran? Is he going to trot on out to a podium and talk about the Giants-Patriots game and the 4th quater and about Jesus being too smart to send Seawolf submarines to the Persian Gulf? Give me a break, Huckabee needs to get his bass and go home, I don't want Elisha anywhere near the "the football" (no not that one, the mushroom kaboom one)
Reagan challenged Ford and refused to concede in 1976. It was the same scenario too. the Party bosses put all the big blue state up front to make Ford the prohibited favorite and fend off a Reagan run. All the more conservative states came towards the end. The same establishmentarians demanded that Reagan drop out but he would not. He went to the convention and swept the final states for all intents and purpose. It positioned him for 1980.
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
Have you read his position papers on Iran, TWOT, Islamic Fascism etc. You obviously haven't because you haven't got a clue!
"The Republican establishment is requiring a level of loyalty from Conservatives than they ever did from John McCain"....Rush Limbaugh
nt
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
that so many of you are so willing to casually dismiss the will of the voters. It is the American people who have cast their ballots in this contest, and 13% of them are being told their voice does not matter. Yet, some of you are fine with that. Care to tell me, and the other voters, exactly why?
You are a guest here, as a Democrat. Who do you think you are, coming into our home, and taking that attitude?
If you want to badmouth us go back to Balloon Juice or something.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
How could asking why 13% of the Republican voters are being ignored be considered bad-mouthing?
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
I don't. I have no idea why you are taking offense, and I have no idea why merely asking the question is considered to be taking an attitude.
I support Governor Mike Huckabee for President.
Everyone ought to take a look at the Rasmussen daily history for the last three days (Feb 9, 10, and 11):
Huck is UP 10 points (to a total of 34%)
McCain is DOWN 9 points (to a total of 46%)
Clearly something is happening.
I'm no fan of Huckabee, but this just so stupid of Luke Esser as to boggle the mind.
He deserves to be called on it.
Or if he is, he is truly clueless about how to do it.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
as i pointed out on the day of the caucus, this is a result (the percentages of votes after the caucuses in Washington) that is meaningless in terms of delegates, or voters, or votes. The delegates elected thru these caucuses go to county conventions later on where they elect delegates to the state caucus, who in turn elect the delegates for the national convention. At no time are the delegates pledged to any candidate.
had this occurred during the *Washington State Primary* which takes place next week, and in which actual *voters* will vote, then Huck would have a complaint.
In this case, however, Huck is complaining about what is essentially a straw poll or an exit poll. Apparently it's the first time the Republican caucus results were announced as if they really mattered. The mcCain people naturally put the results out, assuming that the media would not know that this was basically a straw poll, not actual "votes". Since the medi seem to barely know the difference between a caucus and a primary, this was a correct assumption.
I'm surprised at Huck making this mistake, though, and very surprised that people at Red State are not smarter than the media, as I have assumed.
Knock it off.
I disagree. Huckabee is right to be complaining about how the Washington GOP handled the caucus vote count. What's he supposed to do, sit back and let caucus fraud go unchallenged? I don't blame Huckabee for challenging this.
Mike Griffith
Let Freedom Ring website
http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id47.htm
Straw poll or not, there is a momentum issue here, as much buzz as 2 out of three wins Saturday has caused...can you imagine the buzz that a 3 for 3 sweep by Huckabee would have caused. Even if it doesn't mean anything delegate wise it shows strength and weakness. If it's not important and is meaningless...why bother to do it in the first place?
645 Delegates needed to stop McCain. 58% of remaining delegates Huckabee, Romney, and Paul need to derail the He's Inevitable Express.
This race isn't over!!!
How incredibly dumb of Esser. Is it really that difficult to count the votes? This sort of BS makes the party look bad.
Also, it looks like only sore loser Rombots are complaining about Huckabee on the thread. At least I still have some respect for McCain supporters.
The vote is too close to call. You don't just announce a winner with 13% of the vote not counted. If Senator McCain was ahead by more than 5% then fine..it's a difference of what? Maybe 2%?
Count the votes and release them county by county. This kind of thing makes us look bad.
Broomy