Every Vote Counts... Unless It's Not For Us

So the Democrats have thrown a stumbling block in the confirmation of President Bush's re-election in Congress today, on the grounds that they are “protect[ing] the integrity of the true will of the people.” This is the same reasoning given by Democrats in North Carolina who are getting a do-over on the race for their state's Agriculture Commissioner.

How then, do we explain the shattering stillness of any Democrat-supported cry for a new election in the Washington state governor's race, where Democrat Christine Gregoire picked up a lead of just 130 votes in the third (hand) recount when the results from King County (Seattle and suburbs) were finally tabulated? Stefan Sharkansky and the other bloggers at SoundPolitics.Com have done a fantastic job documenting the, er, irregularities that occurred in the November 2, 2004 election in Washington... like the fact that convicted felons cast votes (here and here), hundreds of provisional votes were improperly counted without verification that the voter was eligible and registered to vote, a large number of military absentee voters (who tend to overwhelmingly vote Republican) didn't receive their absentee ballots until after the election, and dead people voted (here and here and here). The Democrats, of course, think that everything is just peachy. And why not? The Democratic candidate is finally in the lead (after three recounts! Time to stop counting!).

What does it all add up to? Turns out that, in King County alone (Seattle and suburbs, and heavily Democratic), there are several thousand more votes than there are voters who showed up or returned absentee ballots... and almost 8,500 extra votes statewide! Where did the extra votes come from? Why didn't they show up in the two mechanical recounts, only to surface in the hand recount (the one most open to vote fraud)? Why are there more votes than people who cast votes on November 2?

If the Democrats can get excited enough over 300-some odd measly votes that don't put a dent in an 118,000-vote lead in Ohio to throw a monkey wrench in the Electoral College confirmation process, if they can demand (and get) a re-vote because of one malfunctioning voting machine that may or may not have made a difference in North Carolina, why aren't they getting worked up over numerous verified accounts of vote fraud and errors, and a discrepancy between the number of votes cast and the number of voters who cast them that is almost two orders of magnitude greater than the winner's margin of victory?

Because... if a Democrat wins an election then there can't be any fraud, just the will of the people don't you know. If a Republican wins, well, then we know it just had to be stolen. After all, what right-thinking person would vote for a Republican?

Sigh....