It's the details, Jon... the details.

.
Over on Russell's face book page, we're greeted with this:

Let's take a look at this phrase, shall we?

"In Camas 98607, I won all but 1 of Camas' precincts."

Well, no, Jon... you didn't.

"In Washougal 98671, I won every precinct with large margins in the Republican field."

Well, no Jon, you didn't.

You see, Jon, this is part of the many reasons why I see you as being unfit to hold elective office. Words, as you well know, have meaning. (You know, like "earned my degree" and "Doctor" or "Physician?" Words like that?)

At the end of the day, there were many precincts that you flat out lost to Dennis Kampe.

Yes, I know he's a democrat.

But your statement is clear and unambiguous: "In Camas 98607, I won all but 1 of Camas' precincts."

That's simply untrue. The fact is that Dennis Kampe won several of those precincts.

In fact, of the 6 Camas precincts, Kampe beat you in 950, 962, 963, 965 and 985.

Equally unambiguous is this phrase:

"In Washougal 98671, I won every precinct with large margins in the Republican field."

Again, untrue. Of the grand total of 4 (or 5) precincts in Washougal, Kampe beat you in 905, 910 and 914.

You LOST many of the precincts in Washougal... to Kampe.

And this points to the heart of the matter: You exaggerate and puff yourself up by using words that are somewhat less than accurate.

Did you get more votes an Rivers? Mostly.

But for example, when you write: "In Washougal 98671, I won every precinct with large margins in the Republican field," what you chose to leave out (That there are only 4 precincts in Washougal and that you lost to the democrat in at least 2 of those 4 precincts) is much more telling... and factual... then your blanket statement... which I've shown to be untrue.

Get used to the idea that we don't HAVE a "Republican field." What we've got is an every man for themselves (Or woman, as the case may be) primary system. Leaving out the details that include ALL of the information is the thing.

So, how could this nonsense have been written in such a way that it made sense while telling the whole, unvarnished truth?

Simple. Something like this:

"It was a hard fought campaign, where I did very well in the Camas-Washougal area. In many of these precincts, I was the top Republican, but in many of them, I was also bested by Dennis Kampe.

Good luck to Ann Rivers who made it into the top two, and who no doubt will go on to win... and thank you to those who supported me."

Of course, you lost. And as the loser, what would have been best would have been for you to remain silent about how YOU did... because this has never been about you.

This kind of self-serving word parse is what you became known for during the course of your disastrous campaign for Congress and your equally poor campaign for local office once it became clear you had as much chance of growing horns as you did getting elected to Congress.