Well, since judicial races are ostensibly non-partisan, if you do get a voter's pamphlet, you have to look for key words in their blurbs. Endorsements are nice, but if I see "activist judges", that's my cue to stop reading and probably vote for the other guy. In the absence of that, I admit that I would play the odds that Gonzalez is more likely a Democrat.

Prejudiced, sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's what Eastern Washington voters were doing, too, but the other way around.

Judges should not be picked by popular vote. They should be vetted, appointed, and held accountable by elected officals.

@1: What exactly in Gonzalez's profile said "activist judge" to you? Quite the opposite, he received a rating of "well qualified" by Justice for Washington - the conservative organization set up by Alex Hayes dedicated to warning the public about activist judges. And he authored the opinion upholding the liquor privatization initiative. So, yeah, you do just sound prejudiced and ignorant.

@3 - I'm not saying I read his profile. In fact, I didn't. I went by the Stranger's recommendation. My example was from previous elections I've voted in, particularly when "activist judge" was a popular right-wing buzzword.

@1,4: Got it. Sorry. I misunderstood. Since the conservative takeover of the courts "activist judge" has a totally different meaning, I think. I see the right wing as the activists now - blatantly overruling every bit of progressive Constitutional case law they can without creating a revolution in the process.

Either way, Gonzalez was amazing in the fact that he was endorsed by EVERYONE - liberal AND conservative - because his opponent was an idiot douchbag who would bring shame to our legal system by his vary presence on the court. What's crazy is that his opponent was still able to win over 40% of the vote.

Mr. Sanders, it seems to me like you're just beating a dead horse with this issue. Gonzalez won, Danielson lost, move on.

The lack of a voter's pamphlet on state wide races is an abomination. The first priority of government should be to facilitate fair and informed elections. That the state couldn't find money to do this is malfeasance. That being said, I did not vote for Gonzales because the little information I had was that he was endorsed by some groups that I don't agree with. Unfortunately, I didn't see the endorsements he received from groups I do agree with. With that information I would have voted for him. If you are a progressive, ask yourself if you would have voted for a candidate named Gonzales if the only thing you knew was he had been endorsed by the Chamber of Commerce and the Building Industry of Washington!

Since progressive groups are much more active on-line in promoting their candidate choices, some voters may have seen only those endorsements, and lacking any additional information voted the opposite. For the State to not print a voters pamphlet for statewide races due to budget constraints is unbelievable. One of the first responsibilities of government should be to facilitate fair and informed elections.

"you could use the word conservative if you like"

he's so fucking generous! *facepalm*

Perhaps you underestimate the number of Americans that are tired of illegal immigration and the knee-jerk reaction would be voting for the guy obviously not descended from illegal aliens (not that Gonzales was--although he probably was.)

Perhaps you underestimate the number of Americans that are tired of illegal immigration and the knee-jerk reaction would be voting for the guy obviously not descended from illegal aliens (not that Gonzales was--although he probably was.)

Perhaps #11 underestimates the number of Americans who are tired of some racist idiocy dressed up as "anti-illegal immigration" sentiment, mostly spouted by ignorant white jerkoffs who think that they're somehow better than other people who weren't privileged enough to have been born in between certain arbitrarily-drawn lines on a map.

And are the authors outraged that every county in the state but King could vote for a conservative candidate, but if King voted for the liberal, the liberal would win? Is it because King county voters are all so well-informed and the rest of us are clueless hicks, or could it be that they vote knee-jerk liberal, no matter what the issue? I don't see any op-ed pieces out there on this phenomenon...how is that fair?

Rip City Hustle, your post suggests that anyone in the world who wants to should be allowed to immigrate to America. You should check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChG… No, opening our borders will make no difference. The unsquared-away countries of the world need to start figuring out how to square themselves away. People who demand that immigration be executed legally are not "ignorant white jerkoffs," as you say. They are law-abiding people tired of having freeloaders come in and tax an already drained economy of free services, while not paying taxes themselves.

So, davood88, are you suggesting that my vote should count less because I live in King County and not some rural county? That we should be deciding statewide elections on a one vote per county basis?

Washington is a racist state. It isn't an issue of liberal or conservative, since there are many racists on both sides of the equation. For example, when I was doing voter information at the Olympia Farmers Market in 2008 on behalf of the Thurston Co. Democrats, a couple of French guys came up and wanted some Obama buttons and bumper stickers. The "rule" was that the stuff was supposed to go to registered voters. The official Dem party rep asked the men if they would consider registering. One joked that he couldn't as he was an illegal. The Dem party woman looked utterly confused and then opened her idiot mouth and said "Well you don't look like an illegal."

I could write a book the number of times this sort of shit happens in this place. It's either about Latinos or Indians. This state goes ape shit apoplectic anytime a tribe experiences any sort of financial success.

Am I the only one who thinks its a good thing that an individual who did not get appointed by Gregooire, recieved no endorsements from special interest groups or prog blogs & raised no money (where did that $$$ come from BTW?)got a significant amount of the vote?
I serioulsy doubt people are smart enough to research it on their own, so it must be racism right? Good thing his name wasn't "frothy"

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=les%…

Prejudice, but maybe not ethnic prejudice. I know people who would never vote for a former prosecutor to be judge, just as many would never vote for a former public defender - such as McCloud.

I'll take the 60% win as a good start. I agree with #16 that we are a racist state - both Democrats and Republicans. I meet a lot of union guys or environmentalists who vote for Dems but spew a lot of racist bullshit. I gotta say though, that Republicans have made an art form out of taking full advantage of racism. Too many races where Republicans win against better qualified, moderate, pro-business Hispanic-Americans, African-Americans, and Asian-American candidates. If these guys were truly voting their values, you'd think that the minority candidates would get their vote at least some of the time. But they usually get beat out in the primaries, even when they are Republican, so you don't even hear about them. I'm just waiting - WAITING - for these racist Republicans to start their whisper campaigns about how the colored people are gonna vote illegally or run loose in the streets. Hello, we're not in South Carolina, and this isn't the 1950's!