Gregoire the narcissist: Her position is simple --- she'll take the credit for all of the good things to happen to the state during her term (what are those? I guess 3 years of economic growth). However, the bad things (budget deficit, failure to accomplish anything re the Viaduct, the 520 bridge, the reduction of traffic congestion, etc) are all somebody else's fault.

That's the kind of leadership Washington needs!

Where have I seen this before?: Oh yeah, in 2000. When a GOP candidate ran for President as a "compassionate conservative" and talked a lot of empty talk about fiscal conservatism and an "ownership society" that still takes care of the "most vulnerable" in our country. Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice.... Honestly, while Rossi talks a great game about working across party lines and an "entrepreneurial society", we all know what that means: deregulation, cuts in funding for vital programs (education, health care, etc.), reduced environmental protections and massive freeway projects that neither reduce congestion nor provide "freedom" for commuters. Sure, Gregoire has her faults, but Rossi has yet to provide any form of substance on how he would actually govern our State. He mentioned his transportation plan repeatedly last night and Gregoire responded correctly that it is a complete joke. Agreed, she has not shown the leadership necessary on transportation to resolve our transportation woes, but even if Rossi could ram through all the items in his plan (good luck "working with the neighborhoods" to get an 8 lane 520 and how exactly are you going to pay for all of this?) they would take money away from other programs in the general fund and do nothing to provide real freedom in the form of options to driving (mass transit, bike/ped improvements, etc.). Come on Dino, where's the beef?

Gregoire Won Debate Not Rossi: I guess it all depends on whether or not you like to hear antecdotes and personal stories or whether or not you want to discuss problems and solutions for Washington State. Rossi's campaign is one of vaguness and undefined messages.

Like Rossi's for change - that says nothing because change can be for the better or worse. For Rossi change means less environmental reguslation. His BIAW supporters who have spent over $2 million so far in independent expenditures want to see a gutting of land use regulations.

Rossi and the Republicans are all for the free market approach - which is what is causing the economic meltdown on Wall Street. They are misrepresenting what they claim is a $3 billion dollar budget deficit. We do not have a $3 billion dollar deficit. Just as Gregoire says we have an actual surplus in this budget year - something most other states don't have.

There is a projected budget deficit for the next two year budget cycle - but there is no deficit yet because a new budget has not been prepared. Next years Legislature will prepare a new budget.

Gregoire is right - the main cause of this projected deficit is the national economic downturn caused by the Party that Rossi belongs to - the Republican Party of George Bush.

Gregoire is pushing for change that makes sense - like promoting green power and jobs with renewable energy like wind and solar. She has a track record and all that Rossi has is a slick ad campaign that says little about what he will actually do.

Rossi's campaigns are very reminscient of the campaigns George Bush ran - say as little as possible about what you will do and let folks use their imagination to fill in what he will actually do. We see what that got people who voted for Bush. We don't need to repeat that mistake in our state.

RE: Gregoire Won Debate Not Rossi: Let's not damn the concept of the free market because of what's been going on lately. First of all, those who think the modern Republican Party and George Bush are the standard-bearers of small-government, free-market conservatism are out of their minds. In addition, what caused this, at root, was greed and ignorance. Yes, this requires regulation: it also requires education. I would have loved to see provisions for basic financial education in this emergency bill along with mortgage relief, but alas, no luck on that front.

This is not to say that I support Rossi and the Grand Old Party Party: I just hope people don't go overboard and throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Pathetic, Brewster, just pathetic: How many years is it now that you have been twisting yourself into knots, in public, in this town trying to be "fair and balanced" to Republican kleptocrats?

Even the right-wing diehards on (un)Sound Politics didn't think Rossi got the better of this debate.

Quit boring us with meaningless nonsense about "framing" and get to the meat. Rossi would balance the budget on the backs of working people. He put a head tax on patients in NURSING HOMES! How much lower does it get? Gregoire pointed this out in the debate and said, correctly: "These are not our values." Are these YOUR values, David?

The right wing keeps talking about Gregoire's "deficit" even though BY LAW there can BE no deficit. Rossi's supporters fear Gregoire will balance the budget on THEIR backs, and rightly so.

Maybe that's just too horrible for you to contemplate, David. Try a little harder next time not to let it show so much.

_: As a construction guy, I find it amazing that Rossi (who should know better) puts wildly irresponsible cost estimates out there regarding his freeway ideas.

The guy is in the pocket of the sprawl industry.

RE: Gregoire Won Debate Not Rossi: Bush is in no sense a conservative, except maybe in regards to some social issues. He's a big-government Nixonian Republican, what the British call a Tory. Every time I hear people griping about "neocons" I remind them that neoconservatives are liberals that found even the Democrats too crazy for their taste. So now we have a strange assortment of bible thumpers and Scoop Jackson Democrats running the Republican party. The party of Reagan and Goldwater seems to be gone.

RE: Pathetic, Brewster, just pathetic: Easy, there, Ivan. My comments, and the purpose of Guvometer, is to analyse how the race is going, based on breaking events like debates, polls, Obama appearances, and ads. It's not about my values or who I or other writers think should win. I was trying to assess how the candidates would come across to voters who are still deciding, not how well each one played to their committed bases.

What would Dino do?: Here's a comment from the mailbag, filed by David Aldrich:

"You know as well as anyone that candidates will say almost anything to get elected, but once they assume office they confront obstacles that preclude meaningful action–assuming that they were the least bit sincere about their prescriptions in the first place. In Dino Rossi's case, as with most challengers to incumbents, it's relatively easy to take rhetorical potshots, proffer vague solutions, and even suggest dramatic, if not also draconian, actions to fix this or that problem. But suppose the voters elect him, for all the usual inane reasons, now what? My sense is that Rossi hasn't thought that far ahead. His candidacy was merely inevitable, regardless of events."

Not a bad analysis: Pretty good analysis of the debate. I'm a Gregoire supporter, but have to agree that Rossi comes across as a guy you'd want to have a beer with. For the discerning viewer, though, I felt the governor did better. She spoke the obvious truth when she pointed out that he has no plan (read vision) for the environment, education, or health care, to name just two. As is the case too often these days, the outcome of this race will be a contest between substance and style. Let substance win (for once)

Dino lost: Dino appeared to be really forced with his, 'just like you' dumb-guy approach.
He was not direct, it was obvious he doesn't really have a concrete plan, just the same tired old GOP talking points.
If McCain picked a running mate as forceful and together as Christine, I'd be worried.

Credibility?: Mr. Brewster, given what Rove and Cheney have accomplished in the last 8 years, I'm surprised your review contained no mention of the credibility of the two candidates. I think Gregoire has demonstrated herself to be the kind of politician who, agree with her or not, is genuinely concerned with doing the right thing. Republicans, in constrast, have demonstrated that they'll say anything, and I mean anything, to get elected, and that their primary motivation is nearsighted greed.

The big question is, do you (or anyone else) actually believe anything Rossi says?

Blame the economy on 911?: David,

Your editorial on the debate was a bit of wishful thinking.

First of all, you migth be able to implicate Locke in the 2003 budget but you have to be smoking something to let Bush off the hook for the current economy. Two botched wars, deregulation and benign turned into malignant neglect.

Secondly, I'm glad you like the canned stories by Rossi but I'm not sure what your point is. Is substance a problem? Should all debates be homey thirty second soundbites.

Finally, what on earth do you mean by Rossi is seeking bipartisan solutions? Give me an example.

Rich Nafziger

Washington state not Washington DC: Trying to confuse voters with national issues in a state race is Lame! Are undecided voters confused about embryonic and other stem cells? Trying to gain votes on that issue (this is certainly not a Washington state issue!) will backfire! Now it is time to discuss the... what is it now 5?... Law enforcement officers killed in our state under her tenure. And how about the children beat to death or raped repeatedly under the control of DSHS? Time for a change!

RE: Gregoire Won Debate Not Rossi: FYI, there is no such thing as a "free market." Like the easter bunny and Santa Claus, the Free Market is a figment of your imagination. There are poorly regulated markets, and there are well regulated markets, but all are subject to distortions and flaws that make it so they allocate resources inefficiently. And in the most efficient markets on the planet, there are still a broad category of "market failures" in which goods and services that do not conform to basic principles of market economics: infrastructure such as roads, electric power, train tracks, water and sewer systems, health care and other merit goods, ecosystem services such as water and air purification, public space, and so on. . . any time I hear someone saying that "free markets" my response is always "what free markets?"

Dem's sue over GOP moniker to disenfrancise Military vote?: Does Christine Gregoire really think suing over the "Prefers GOP" is going to help her case? Even if she wins the lawsuit and manages to get all of the overseas absentee votes thrown out that have "Prefers GOP" on them, what has she really gained in the end? This is possibly the most pathetic display of a failing candidate in recent memory. This should cost her the election.

RE: Gregoire the narcissist: The traffic congestion issues are not Gregoire's fault. It's the voters who insist on complaining about traffic and not putting their MONEY WHERE THEIR MOUTH IS! PERIOD. As for the deficit, BLAME TIM EYMAN AND HIS HAIRBRAINED IDEAS.. and then the voters who FALL FOR IT and then wonder.. gee.. where did that money go?

RE: Dem's sue over GOP moniker to disenfrancise Military vote?: Fair representation is not out of the ordinary. It's obvious that Rossi is trying to distance himself from Bush and the Republican party... It's only fair that Rossi is KNOWN to be part of these bozo's.