So, here's a question: at what point does someone in the State elections office get to make a determination that, due to the large number of mismarked ballots turned in, the election results can no longer be considered legitimate? 10%? 25%? Does such an option even exist?

It seems that if a signifcant number of these ballots are thrown out, at some point someone in either party is going to raise a ruckus, demand a recount or new election, or challenge the results in court.

Another question: why should taxpayers (and non-partisan voters) continue to subsidize the nominating processes of the two largest political parties? Why shouldn't our Primary Ballots consist only of non-partisan races? Party bullet voters can hold nominating conventions at their own expense.

Further proof that people in Snohomish County are 4 times dumber than people in King County.

Of course, if Washington had party registration like a civilized state, this moronic failure at an extremely simple task wouldn't happen.

Laurence Ballard asks:

"Another question: why should taxpayers (and non-partisan voters) continue to subsidize the nominating processes of the two largest political parties? Why shouldn't our Primary Ballots consist only of non-partisan races?"

It's the law, that's why. Go whine to your legislator. Good luck with that.

Thank you 'Ivan.' Obviously it's the "law" as you so curtly remind us - my question was why should it so be.

The primary exists, in part, to prevent the parties from committing fraud.

Of course, I see no reason why the state can't BILL the #)_*$_!@#*$ parties for the cost of the new non-blanket primary....

FYI for non-King County residents: you can look up your county elections office at http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/auditors.aspx

Laurence Ballard says:

"Thank you 'Ivan.' Obviously it's the "law" as you so curtly remind us - my question was why should it so be."

Because people prefer it, why do you think? Would you rather have people decide who will represent the parties in a back room somewhere, or in an open election?

Or maybe you think political parties should just go away. Some people do think that, I guess. Damn few, in my experience, and not enough to make it happen.

It's the party officials who like the current structure for primaries, not the average voter. Voters in this State have traditionally enjoyed and preferred the greater freedom of a blanket primary, losing that option when Party Officials came up with a compelling - and winning (if circular) -legal argument resulting in our pick-a-party primary. And there are other options between the binary choices of 'back rooms' or 'open election(s).' For one thing, True Believing Party Members could hold meaningful open-membership nominating conventions on their own dime and time. Keep my tax dollars out of it. As an Independent, I don't wish to pay for their nominating process. Primary ballots would be the same for all voters as only non-partisan candidates and issues need appear.

I fully understand the necessity for Parties to have control over candidates using their name and running on their label. But unlike parliamentarians, Washington voters have never been keen on declaring party membership. We tend to vote for the individual. Particularly in a state where only a generation ago, progressives and conservatives could be found in both major parties.

Keep primary elections independent and more about voters, candidates, and issues - less about the internal partisan machinations of the two dominant political parties who think they are the system and are thumbing for a free electorial ride.