Talk:2006 Washington State Supreme Court election

message: Expanded the list of candidates to include all who have filed with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission. Added contact information when available and ordered the candidates alphabetically by last name. Indicated the incumbents running for reelection and removed the "challenger" flag from all others as redundant. Replaced the Wiki link on the candidate names; latter editors can decide if the candidates merit a page of their own and can add those in as needed. I will be adding a page for the PDC this weekend. Added the 'Future election' template at the top of the page.
TechBear 15:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I was just about to add the Supreme Court races to the above page when I found in a Google search that this article already existed. 
(Update: Never mind, I see how the thing is organized now. I was confused because the state Court of Appeals is on the local page. Perhaps something should be done about that)
Nakadai 00:00, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[Washington State Local elections, 2006]]? 

message: Once a person has filed papers with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission declaring themselves to be a candidate in a non-partisan race (such as for a seat on the state Supreme Court), that person remains a candidate until they file papers with the PDC stating that they have withdrawn from the race. After a quick (and admittedly incomplete) check of the PDC website, I didn't find any candidates that had filed such papers. 
Until the primary on September 17, I think all registered candidates should be listed. Candidates who withdraw should remain listed until after the primary with an annotation showing that they were a candidate but have withdrawn (just a simple Withdrawn after the name is fine.) After the primary, only candidates in the General Election (or the winning candidate for that seat, annotated as Winner ) should be listed. Does this sound reasonable? TechBear 01:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding revisions and elimination of candidates 

message: Any candidate who does not file with the Secretary of State or County Auditor during filing week should be removed.
To follow up on my own post:
Only five candidates have filed for Position 2 and two for Position 9. Why should people who did not file, did not pay the filing fee, and will not be on the ballot, remain in the list of candidates? As of 5 pm today, they are not candidates.
I was simply going to go through and remove them, but so long as the matter is in dispute, I won't.
 
67.185.114.32 00:18, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Chadlupkes 17:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing candidates 

message: I noted the non-filers, but as long as everyone agrees, I'll remove them.
67.185.114.32 01:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair enough. 

message: I hope no-one minds, but the organizations that seek to influence this election are sufficiently different from the candidates (by law) that they deserve their own section, so I created it. rewinn 15:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Organizations

message: I believe that Washington is a bit odd in how it handles judicial primaries, where a candidate who receives a majority in the primary automatically wins the seat and the race is struck from the general election ballot. Does this oddity merit a paragraph of explanation, or is the current text clear enough in explaining that Alexander and Owens will not be participating in the General Election? TechBear 19:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brief explanation of how judicial primaries work? 

message: http://www.burrageforsupremecourt.com = Dead link / Internet Esquire (talk) 10:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link in article