Tuesday, August 08, 2006

Waiting for Connecticut

The most interesting domestic political event for some time is going down in Connecticut today. A pretty fair blow-by-blow can be followed on the Connecticut chapter of Lefty Blogs.

Lieberman’s web site went down and his campaign accused Lamont forces of a denial of service attack. Bull-Pucky! The explanation, and an account of Lamont’s honorable response, is on Kos. Link

ABC’s The Note reports:

There are no pooled network exit polls. The Connecticut Legislation and Elections website (Link) will be updated continually, as soon as information comes in. The state is using a brand new system, which may or may not work. Should the system not work, officials are prepared with a spreadsheet and the site should be updated at roughly fifteen minute intervals with results.

Lever machines will dominate in today's primary, with a smattering of optical scan voting places. And here is a chart, courtesy of the excellent folks at the AP, detailing the timing of the reporting of results on election night in 2004 to use as a guide for tonight.

First Reports from Counties: 8:35 pm ET
20% of Precincts Statewide by: 10:00 pm ET

Speaking of voting…I wish I believed in the tamper-proof character of optical and electronic voting, but I don’t. I would much prefer to mark my X on a paper ballot which was counted at the voting place under the watchful eyes of judges from the major parties.

In CD 8 news Patty Weiss has two TV commercials up on her web site for your viewing pleasure. Good production values, very slick, just what you would expect from an old pro. Link

44 comments:

sirocco said...

There is no reason whatsoever to believe in the security of optical or electronic voting. Unless there is a paper trail.

Given the very poor track record of Deibold and other manufacturers, I am really reaching the point where their continued fight against being required to provide paper tracking seems to be a willful attempt to maintain the ability to skew elections.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
x4mr said...

Still at 52% with 87% reporting.

Cannot overstate the screaming of my alarms regarding electronic voting and creating an election system that can be hijacked. Already a little paranoid that it has been. I'm an old schooler big time on this one. Though not impossible, it is hard to mess with millions of pieces of paper.

If we let the system become vulnerable to a few keyboard strokes.......

George Tuttle said...

A little slickness on Patty's commericals is like putting lipstick on a pig. Nothing can disguise the fact that she is nothing but someone who has flipped-flopped on Iraq and stole many of Latas' issues.

I wonder if she used a prompter on these commericals, or did she sell her integrity..again.

AZYouLikeIt said...

"Stole Latas' issues?"

Did he patent them? File a trademark and say, "No one else can talk about these issues, they're mine!"?

Last I checked, Iraq was an issue that everyone ought to care about and claim as their own, not just the veterans in the race.

Patty has certainly honed, clarified, and expanded her stance on Iraq and many other issues since the race began (as a good candidate should), but calling her a flip-flopper is just silly.

Going back to Sirocco's original comment -- you're right on. I think the need to secure and verify our voting system is one thing everyone here can agree on. Every time Diebold fights off a paper trail, it's another piece of evidence that this company has no interest in democracy, beyond figuring out how to cheat at it.

TooBlue4U said...

George Tuttle sure knows integrity when he sees it. Must be a ton of integrity for GG to run her spots when she knows that they weren't true. See today's Star: http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/141348.php

Liza said...

tooblue4u,
Thanks for the link to the Star article. This is really interesting. The real beneficiary of this Gifford's TV ad seems to be the Star's Daniel Scarpinato who is being praised for his investigative reporting. I noticed that the comments related to the article are mostly negative towards Giffords. No one is defending her, at least not yet. It would probably be a good tactical move right now for her handlers to scrap this ad and move on.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
anonymous said...

There is no need to talk to the campaign. All the facts can be found here: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/

Why would the Star want to give Gabby a chance to spin it? What happened to freedom of the press? KRAMAJALES - ARE YOU AGAINST THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS? MUST THEY GET GABBY's PERMISSION? IS THIS WHAT GABBY STANDS FOR?

x4mr said...

Calm down, anon.

Without question this article is a blow to the Giffords campaign and certainly think they should respond and quickly.

From my experience, it is common practice for reporters to contact parties for comment on a story before they run it, including those comments as deemed appropriate. Don't get that this occurred, and not clear what it means if anything.

What I find a little interesting, and really not clear that it means anything, is the absolute crucifixion fest of comments posted after the online story.

anonymous said...

The post on azstarnet reflect the mood of the voters.

Rex Scott said...

I AM PASTING BELOW A POST I ORIGINALLY PUT ON TEDSKI'S SITE:

Before the anti-Giffords bloggers get all high and mighty and fill this site with vitriol, let's recall that Gabby's ad cites an Associated Press article, likely written by someone like Howard Fischer, who covers the Legislature full time and is more familiar with its operations than Daniel Scarpinato.

Linda Binder, then a GOP senator and one of two moderates (the other being Slade Mead) that planned to vote against the budget, was getting ready to leave the country. The GOP leadership knew that and wanted to get a vote without Binder opposing them. Gabby's maneuver foiled them and the budget was not voted on until Binder returned to Phoenix, when it was defeated.

Scarpinato points out that Gabby's vote would have killed the bills in committee, but anyone even remotely familiar with how the Legislature operates knows that the leadership would have revived the bills in another form for a second round. The KEY was having the votes to defeat the ENTIRE budget when it came to the floor. The record from that time shows that Binder and Mead's votes were crucial to the eventual outcome (Mead lost his seat in a GOP primary partly because of that vote and is now a Democrat!) and Gabby ensured that Binder was in Phoenix when crunch time came.

Look, it is pretty lame to take this story and spin it into a big lie that Gabby lacks Democratic credentials, especially when you see the support she has gotten from all segments of of the party. I don't question the party loyalty of Weiss or any of the other candidates and a former party chairman who once tried to unite all Democrats should be ashamed of himself this morning. Let's play fair in pursuit of this nomination so that we can be ready to come together behind the winner and beat the Republicans.

Rex Scott said...

FULL DISCLOSURE: I ORIGINALLY POSTED THIS ON TEDSKI'S SITE-

Before the anti-Giffords bloggers get all high and mighty and fill this site with vitriol, let's recall that Gabby's ad cites an Associated Press article, likely written by someone like Howard Fischer, who covers the Legislature full time and is more familiar with its operations than Daniel Scarpinato.

Linda Binder, then a GOP senator and one of two moderates (the other being Slade Mead) that planned to vote against the budget, was getting ready to leave the country. The GOP leadership knew that and wanted to get a vote without Binder opposing them. Gabby's maneuver foiled them and the budget was not voted on until Binder returned to Phoenix, when it was defeated.

Scarpinato points out that Gabby's vote would have killed the bills in committee, but anyone even remotely familiar with how the Legislature operates knows that the leadership would have revived the bills in another form for a second round. The KEY was having the votes to defeat the ENTIRE budget when it came to the floor. The record from that time shows that Binder and Mead's votes were crucial to the eventual outcome (Mead lost his seat in a GOP primary partly because of that vote and is now a Democrat!) and Gabby ensured that Binder was in Phoenix when crunch time came.

Look, it is pretty lame to take this story and spin it into a big lie that Gabby lacks Democratic credentials, especially when you see the support she has gotten from all segments of of the party. I don't question the party loyalty of Weiss or any of the other candidates and a former party chairman who once tried to unite all Democrats should be ashamed of himself this morning. Let's play fair in pursuit of this nomination so that we can be ready to come together behind the winner and beat the Republicans.

AZYouLikeIt said...

OK, Rex, cut out the spamming. I generally like your comments, even though I disagree with you, but there's no need to repost novels like that.

We all read both blogs. A simple link to your comments on Tedski's site would've sufficed.

The fact remains that Gabby was the tying vote at the appropriations committee, but she left town to go to a DLC convention when the bill she claims to have blocked came up for a vote.

When Gabby pitched this great idea for a "quorum queen" ad, was she not aware that the bill passed the committee on a party line vote? I guess maybe not, if she wasn't there to see it.

George Tuttle said...

Gabby's ad lied.

End of story.

Ain't no spinning that.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Rex Scott said...

I am pretty techologically challenged, azyoulikeit, and would not begin to know how to post a link. The fact that I inadvertently posted the above TWICE should testify to my lack of expertise in that arena.

The facts are that the GOP wanted to get their entire budget passed while Linda Binder was out of the country. Those of us whose jobs (I am an educator) would have been negatively affected if the GOP leadership had passed its budget were deeply grateful to the Governor, the two GOP moderates (Binder and Mead) AND Giffords.

I hope the campaign releases both the text of the AP article cited in Gabby's ad AND other press coverage from that time. The Star reporter should have done some more homework. The Giffords people need to make sure the full story is told. Folks like Tuttle, who is looking for anything to go after BOTH Giffords and Weiss (see his blog for examples) to help his candidate, need to tone down the rhetoric

AZYouLikeIt said...

Yes, Tuttle's rhetoric is heated, but then again, so is Roger's. This campaign needs to come with a "nomex required" warning label.

I noticed Patty's campaign just jumped on the bandwagon too -- calling on Gabby to pull the ad and apologize.

I just want to know how Gabby remembers her little quorum stunt as happening in the dark of night... when it happened at 6:28, and sun wouldn't even set for another 50 minutes!

x4mr said...

Both god and the devil are in the details, and given the thorough howling and wailing about SB1065, no doubt we're in for a lesson on Senate proceedings and procedures. The facts are no doubt on their way.

What I find particularly interesting is the timing of the Weiss press release and that it bears all the signs of a completely polished product.

There is no way in hell that release was written in a couple hours this morning. NO WAY.

Weiss campaign knew this article was coming and had the press release prepared for it.

anonymous said...

Perhaps having Governor Napolitano's former speech writer on board can help get out a well polished speech quickly. Something tells me the Governor has the best in the business in AZ and for Weiss to get one from the Governor is nothing short of an hidden endorsement by Janet. It's not like these facts were secret until today. All anyone had to do was go to: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ to see the record. I know I know, Gabby and company are afraid to go to that website. It is full of dark ugly GOP-helping, Wal-Mart loving skeletons.

AZYouLikeIt said...

Why is it so shocking that Patty's campaign knew the story was coming?

Scarpinato was in Phoenix for several days verifying the story. If Patty's campaign heard about it but Gabby's didn't, it would seem Gabby's folks ought to keep a closer ear to the pavement.

At the end of the day, the ad is still false, and Gabby still hasn't bothered to correct her factually inaccurate statements. This is not a story that will go away or be turned into a process story of who-wrote-what-when.

This is about credibility and telling the truth to the voters.

If Gabby's supporters can't handle that, they need to take a look inside at what they really want from their elected representatives.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
anonymous said...

Gabrielle has no credibility.

Roger, you are just sick.

AZYouLikeIt said...

The ad is a lie!

How can you claim that the sentence "I blocked that late-night vote" is true?

It contains a noun, an adjective, and a verb: "vote," "late-night," and "blocked."

There was no vote, and it was not late at night. Therefore the verb "blocked" could not accurately describe what she did to either the adjective or the noun.

You can spin the truthiness of the ad all you want, and complain that a budget process is hard to boil down to a 30-second ad, but that still won't make the sentence "I blocked that late-night vote" become true.

Because it isn't.

x4mr said...

Giffords Campaign Response

anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
anonymous said...

All spin and no substance. Typical of a Republican oh wait I forgot she is a Democrat now. or DINO should I say?

Funny how she does not address WHY she was not there the following week after this Save the day heroic (which is still a big fat lie)

gabby gabby gabby....

Ben R said...

The response was not a "point by point refutation" as we were previously promised. We didn't get it because they can't refute most of the points.

From the ad:
"Nighttime."
Not true - it was before sundown.

"I blocked that late night vote"
Not true - Corrected version reads "I delayed the early evening introduction of that bill and then I left town for DC and missed my committee's vote on that bill."

Her ad is true in the same way that its true for me to say that I can dunk a basketball. I can't really dunk a basketball, but I can touch the rim. Usually.

And after the last time I did I went to DC and hung out with Joe Lieberman for 4 days.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ben R said...

Kral,

You're not going to vote for her, but I'll answer your question.

I first started paying attention to this race in February. I went to every (Democratic) candidates website, and read about them and their issues. I had an open mind. I'm not an insider, and I did not know who Giffords was. I never really watch TV news, and though I did know of Patty Weiss, I don't recall ever seeing her on the news.
What I read caused me to choose Patty Weiss. I believe that 34 years as a journalist has given her the experience necessary to understand the issues of the day, as well as to have a good understand of the people who live in this district and what they care about.
I think she has a lot of integrity, and she is willing to stand up for what is right. She supports universal healthcare, an issue thats important to me as my father has no health insurance. She supports gay rights, and I'm sick of seeing Democrats back away from this issue. What I see in Patty is someone who is the real deal. Someone who is going to do whats right. I'm tired of the Joe Lieberman Dems that try to hedge and appease conservatives. We need someone who will stand up for us. I see that in Patty.
I'm looking for someone who will do whats right all of the time, who will tell us the truth all of the time, and not just say the what she thinks will get her elected. Patty has that integrity.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
boohoo said...

Kral writes, "anything to harm Latas or Weiss' reputation. Nothing. Then they came after her...painting her as something she isn't...that she just isn't."

Latas never attack any of the candidates in this race and you have no reason to state this line.

He was very gracious at the Nuke Club last month.

He has shown not only his integrity the entire time in this race but has stayed will above this fighting that you think is so damaging.

Personally, I've never trusted GG. I heard her say at forums that after she left Price Water in NY, she "put on her boots, climbed in her truck and came home to save her ailing father's tire store." Something like that.

Did she really have a pick-up in NY? She lost the family business which doesn’t get much ink and to save it she cut benefits and wages after the first year she was the president. She claims to have worked on the floor of El Campo and changes many a tire, but in reality, she locked herself in an office (when she actually showed up) and never came out to “change tires” in her short history of the only job she really every had which her daddy gave her. (doesn’t take much to find x-employees)

She has made claim after claim that I find questionable, I just figure that's politics as usual and reason enough for me not to back her.

Her list of board positions here in Tucson, OK maybe she has board membership in all those organizations but what's her attendance on all these boards? My guess, less than lack luster just like her legislative presents.

Kral, next time don't cry when you post. It makes you look less then the man you say you are.

George Tuttle said...

Roger-stand by your words. WHERE DID LATAS ATTACK GIFFORDS?

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Darapti said...

Kral...

It's the nature of politics to attack your opponent. Always has been, always will be. The trick, as a political activist, is not to let attacks distract you from your goal---getting your guy or gal elected.

Don't let Patty's sanctimonious campaigning get uder your skin. Remember, she has no other course in the campaign:

From the standpoint of practical political action, participation, or legislative experience there is no "there" there.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Blue in AZ said...

Kral,

What Jeff Latas did at Nucleus was classy, respectful, and stuck to the issues and the facts:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W-Yb7Ti0eI

He appears in command and very congressional.

wearetribal said...

Ben r, since you are not one of the people here who have posted scores of times, I will respond to you as a real person who may even change their mind and not the hidden campaign workers I take most of the others here to be. I mean, who else has that kind of time?

I understand your idea that Weiss's experience as a reporter gave her an ability to understand issues well. It is what the media has a great interest in having you believe. But it is very far from my experience that reporters mostly understand what they are talking about before they open their mouths. They study how to write in college, but not how to think or really research.

Weiss's recent comments about fuel efficency, for example, were just plain wrong. Cars averaging 35 mpg will never mean we need no foreign oil (domestic production being 15% below what we consume before cars even enter the equation).

And her support for universal health care, well please go to her own website and carefully read that section. Note the part where she says how it will be paid for...with "deductions from Social Security, paychecks, and welfare." Gee, thanks for nothing, Patty. Her universal health care plan is for everyone to pay for their own, including the extremely poor, retired, and disabled who currently are covered free. Because heaven forbid we ask wealthy people to help out those less fortunate by raising their taxes.

So I think you may want to look at Weiss a bit harder before you back her.

Latas, there is just a bottom line for me. We have to win this seat for the Democrats. It can make a huge difference in the world if the Dems take the 15 seats they need. Latas just does not have the cash, or name recognition to do without it, or volunteers to do without it. Sure, we could get lucky and face Graf...but it is just too important to take that risk.

And of the candidates, Giffords is the one prepared through experience and established Washington connections to get things accomplished when elected. She is the one best able to take on the Republican nominee. And she is a smart honest person who fights for the right things, which is why basically all the endorsements are going her way. Weiss got her husbands Psychology groups endorsement, and that is about it.

boohoo said...

Giffords lied and has no credibility now.

The repugs have no easy target now. They wanted GG, she's got many more bones in her closet. Anyone can find them if you just know where to look.

Liza said...

I would encourage everyone to vote for the CD8 candidate (Latas, Weiss, Giffords, Rodriguez, or Schacter) who you would want to represent you in the House. Money is not an issue. Whoever wins the primary will be funded. The Democratic Party wants this seat, make no mistake about it.