by Lee, 05/31/2012, 10:36 PM

Scott Morgan has a post up today asking why Democrats continue to defend the drug war. He quotes Paul Waldman at The American Prospect, who wrote this:

At the moment, there remains a strong incentive to support the status quo, lest you be targeted in your next race as some kind of hippie-lover. The incentives on the other side, on the other hand, are almost nil. When was the last time somebody lost a race for being too tough on drugs? The half of Americans who favor marijuana legalization are not an organized voting bloc that gets together to punish its opponents at the polls.

Waldman posted that on Tuesday the 29th. On that same day, Texas Congressman Silvestre Reyes was defeated in a primary by El Paso City Council member Beto O’Rourke. O’Rourke decided to challenge Reyes after the longtime Congressman fought back against O’Rourke’s attempt to pass a city resolution calling for a broader debate on drug policy, including legalization. Reyes ran attack ads trying to paint O’Rourke as being soft on drugs. And it backfired. O’Rourke captured over 50% of the vote and prevented even a runoff.

While some may argue that there were several factors beyond the drug war that led to Reyes’ defeat, the Attorney General’s race in Oregon a few weeks ago was clearly an example of someone losing a race for being too tough on drugs. Former U.S. Attorney Dwight Holton was the early favorite to win the Democratic nomination for Attorney General, but his previous attempts to undermine Oregon’s medical marijuana laws came back to haunt him, as underdog Ellen Rosenblum attacked him over that and won a landslide victory. In that race, medical marijuana was clearly the main differentiator between the candidates, and the “tough of drugs” candidate got demolished.

Morgan sums it up really well:

Really, the whole notion that candidates who support reform will be labeled as “hippie-lovers,” is nothing more than a fictitious cliché without a single good example to justify its utterance. Instead, we’re witnessing the emergence of the exact opposite, a new dynamic in democratic races wherein a history of defending the drug war is a political liability that can be exploited to powerful effect by candidates who side with the majority of voters in favoring reform.

That’s why it’s so frustrating to see observers like Waldman, who supports reforming drug policy, nevertheless endeavor to uphold the notion that political realities require our leaders to do the wrong thing. If Obama were to read that analysis and find it convincing, Waldman would have succeeded in helping the President rationalize his refusal to support reform. We’re hurting our cause when we say stuff like this, and worse yet, the idea itself isn’t even true.

I’ve often argued that Democratic support for the drug war isn’t as much a result of special interest pandering as it seems (although that certainly happens). Much of it is just inertia from a time not long ago when this political calculus was actually true. But times have changed quite drastically in the past 10-20 years, and those who’ve noticed the change are being rewarded by the voters. And those who aren’t are finding themselves like Silvestre Reyes and Dwight Holton, wondering how they managed to lose to “some kind of hippie-lover”.

by Carl, 05/31/2012, 8:58 PM

I still think a closed primary is better than an open one. But I’m coming around to the system we have. So reading my friend Ray’s piece on the California top 2 system, here are some rambling thoughts on the process here.

The goofiness of having Democrats run against Democrats in a general election is both the main hurdle to acceptance and what I’ve come to like about it. So, yeah, it makes it tougher for Democrats to elect the most liberal person in liberal districts. And it makes it tougher for the Democrats to control who is their nominee.

On the other hand, we’ll have campaigns in 2 of Seattle’s Legislative Districts doing independent GOTV. It can help statewide elections to have local elections that matter. And, I like having some choice in November.

I’d prefer if we went back to the old system, or better yet had a primary where Democrats couldn’t help pick the Republican nominee or Republicans pick the Democratic nominee. But I’m not as opposed to the system as I was when we got it.

by Darryl, 05/31/2012, 5:12 PM

A new poll came out yesterday in the gubernatorial race between Jay Inslee (D) and Rob McKenna (R) yesterday. The poll was by Seattle-based Strategies 360, and showed McKenna leading Inslee 43% to 39%. The poll was taken from 22nd through the 24th of May on a sample of 500 likely voters (MOE 4.4%).

Before I get into the analysis, I have two confessions.

First, I ignored the Strategies 360 poll from last September. Basically, I was told they were working as a partisan (Democratic) pollster, and for that reason failed my inclusion criteria. When I saw the results yesterday, I got curious and called their VP of Polling and Research, Kevin Ingham. He set the record straight. They don’t work for candidates, and their election polls are not done on behalf of a partisan client. Okay….they’re in!

The second confession is that there was another poll in May that I previously missed. It came out while I was off-line travelling for a couple of days, and by the time I stumbled across the poll it was old. That poll was from SurveyUSA and had McKenna leading Inslee 40% to 38%. The poll was taken on May 8th and 9th on a sample of 557 individuals (MOE 4.2%).

With two polls for May, one taken early, one later, I’ll analyze them together using a Monte Carlo analysis of a million simulated elections.

Between the two polls, there were 1057 “votes” of which 844 went for either McKenna or Inslee. Inslee received 407 “votes” (38.5%) and McKenna received 438 (41.4%) “votes.” The simulated elections were won by Inslee 221,876 times and McKenna, 770,944 times. Here is the distribution of election outcomes from the simulations:

TwoMayPolls

The results suggest that, if the election was held in May, Inslee would have had a 22.3% probability of winning the election, and McKenna would have won with a 77.7% probability. By standard statistical inference, McKenna’s lead is “not significant.” He’s have to have a 95% or greater probability of winning for a “significant” lead. Still…I’d rather have a 78% probability than 22% probability of winning….

The larger trend in the election can be seen from the collection of polls:

GenericCongress01May12-31May12Washington

A reasonable read of the raw polling data is that McKenna maintains a small lead over Inslee at this point in the race.

by Carl, 05/31/2012, 8:02 AM

- These people aren’t advocating for “life.” They are advocating a political strategy that stigmatizes a legal medical procedure in order to punish those they see as sexually transgressive with either death or the financial instability that follows from a lack of reproductive choice. [h/t]

- The gun violence problem is in Seattle. The solution is in Olympia. Maybe, but let’s not ignore what Seattle can do and let’s also not ignore the gun violence in the rest of the state.

- Chart of the day.

- Lord knows I’m a terrible speller. But Amercia?

- I found this piece on dead pigeons quite fascinating, but note there were some graphic videos/pictures.

- Sometimes I listen to Mariners games on the other team’s feed (you get a different assessment than from the Seattle announcers). Early this season, when they were playing the A’s, the radio guy said that there was another event at the same time as the game the following day, so everybody take public transportation. It wasn’t a wishy-washy you might want to consider type of thing. I don’t know if we need a system as comprehensive as BART before we can not be worried about getting stuck in traffic when we build sports stadiums.

- Honk if you love Jesus

by Darryl, 05/30/2012, 9:12 PM
Obama Romney
99.9% probability of winning 0.1% probability of winning
Mean of 326 electoral votes Mean of 212 electoral votes

My previous analysis of state head-to-head polls showed President Barack Obama leading Romney with a mean of 323 to 215 electoral votes. Obama had a 99.5% probability of winning; Romney had a 0.5% chance.

Six new polls have been released since then. I’ve also fixed a few minor errors (largely in older polls) thanks to some more help from Sam Minter:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
CA LA Times 17-May 21-May 1002 3.5 56 37 O+19
CO PNA/Keating 21-May 24-May 601 4.0 48 44 O+4
MI PPP 24-May 27-May 600 4.4 53 39 O+14
MO PPP 24-May 27-May 602 4.0 45 44 O+1
WA Strategies 360 24-May 27-May 500 4.4 51 40 O+11
WI Marquette 23-May 26-May 625 51.2 43.0 O+8.2

That’s a rather blue collection of new polls.

Both of the current California polls have double-digit leads for Obama.

In Colorado, Obama squeaks out +4% over Romney, whereas the previous poll had them tied. Overall the trend in Colorado polls looks favorable for Obama:
ObamaRomney30Apr12-30May12Colorado

Michigan gives Obama a remarkable +14% lead over Romney. One has to go back eight polls, to November 2011, to find a poll in which Romney is leading. Obama has managed to turn Michigan around, from toss-up to solid Obama, over the past six months:

ObamaRomney30Apr12-30May12Michigan

In Missouri, Obama has a meager +1% lead over Romney. Up to now, Missouri has given a small edge to Romney over Obama. My hunch is that further polling would put the state back into Romney territory. Here are the polls to date:

ObamaRomney30Apr12-30May12Missouri

The new Washington poll puts Obama at +11% over Romney. Both current WA polls give Obama double digit leads.

We have six current polls in Wisconsin. And all but one goes to Obama. With today’s poll, the trend cannot be considered good news for Romney:

ObamaRomney30Apr12-30May12Wisconsin

Now, after 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 99,941 times and Romney wins 59 times (including the 13 ties). Obama gains three electoral votes for an average of 326 to Romney’s 212. If the election was held now, Obama would have a 99.9% probability of beating Romney, based on the polling data.

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
Read the rest of this entry »

by Carl, 05/30/2012, 5:18 PM

As I was leaving work today, I was told to be careful. The implication, I suppose, that because of the awful things that had happened earlier today that with the suspect then still on the loose, that I should be afraid walking home. That perhaps I shouldn’t go out for dinner if I was planning it. That maybe I shouldn’t go out for a bike ride after work even if it’s nice out, because who knows?

And I appreciate the concern. I get the fear. But you can’t wall yourself off from life because of some slim possibility that something will happen. You can’t hide from fear. For those of us who live or work or play in Seattle, well, it’s our city.

It’s not the city of the gunmen. It’s not the city of the drug dealers or the gangsters. It’s not the city of criminals. It’s our city.

Obviously, none of this is to say that we should ignore crime or murder on a policy level, or that there aren’t policies that we should implement to prevent future tragedies of this nature. I hope this prompts us to look at our gun culture and our culture of violence. What it should mean is that we can still live our lives in our city.

by Darryl, 05/30/2012, 11:07 AM

Via Slog:

Tim Eyman’s 2/3 majority requirement for raising new state revenue is unconstitutional, according to King County Superior Court Judge Bruce E. Heller.

The law enacted through Initiative 1053 is ruled unconstitutional; it directly contradicts the Washington State Constitution, Article II, Section 22:

No bill shall become a law unless on its final passage the vote be taken by yeas and nays, the names of the members voting for and against the same be entered on the journal of each house, and a majority of the members elected to each house be recorded thereon as voting in its favor.

Of course, the ruling will be appealed and, ultimately, settled by the Supreme Court. With any luck, the Supreme Court won’t be able to weasel its way out of a substantive ruling this time….

The next question: If I-1053 is unconstitutional, what should be the fate of its latest incarnation, I-1185, should it get enough signatures to qualify for the ballot? Will AG Rob McKenna sue Eyman to keep an unconstitutional initiative off the ballot?

You know, like AG Christine Gregoire did with Goldy’s Horses’ Ass initiative.

by Carl, 05/30/2012, 7:44 AM

These anti-choice acts of violence that have nothing to do with any other act of violence have come fast these last few days.

A New Orleans women’s health organization was destroyed last week by an unknown arsonist, becoming the latest target of attacks on women’s health clinics in the south.

The organization, Women With A Vision, was likely singled out because it offers AIDS prevention help, HIV testing, and substance abuse assistance to sex workers, transgender women, poor women, and women of color. The clinic also does community outreach and education on those issues. Like two incidents in Georgia last week, no one was injured in the fire, but the clinic lost a good share of its resources.

This incident and the countless — unrelated — ones like it that have nothing whatever to do with the political rhetoric that opposing women’s rights to control their own bodies. It certainly has nothing to do with a climate of violence.

[h/t]

by Darryl, 05/29/2012, 7:05 PM

Rob McKenna is being sued by some 90 women. The reason is his participation in the Attorneys General lawsuit against the 2009 Patient Protection and Affordable Care act (i.e. “Obamacare”). The group argues that:

[...] McKenna violated his ethical duties as an attorney by pushing for the entire health-care law to be overturned; that McKenna should be forced to file a corrective pleading with the US Supreme Court saying that he only opposes the individual mandate aspect of the health care law, which requires every US citizen to get insurance; and that the court should find McKenna guilty of issuing “false and misleading statements” about the health care law because he claimed that his lawsuit was aimed not at overturning the entire act, but only at eliminating the individual mandate.

McKenna has been lying to Washingtonians. He has repeatedly claimed that he supports some aspects of the law, all the while participating in the effort to overturn the entire law.

Today we learn that King County Superior Court judge Sharon Armstrong will not issue preliminary injunction directing McKenna to fix the inconsistencies between his public and legal positions by amending his Supreme Court briefings.

The meme in the mainstream media seems to chalk the ruling up as a perliminary victory for McKenna. But Publicola political uberwonks Erica C. Barnett and Josh Feit (now at Crosscut) catch the more nuanced meaning of the ruling—the courts won’t judge McKenna for his political lies:

Although King County Superior Court Judge Sharon Armstrong’s rejection of a request to enjoin McKenna from arguing against the federal health care law certainly looks like a win for McKenna, the ruling effectively finds that, contrary to his public statements, he has in his legal motions consistently opposed the entire Affordable Care Act, not just the requirement that every American buy health insurance. The judge specifically said that McKenna’s public statements were “political statements” that had to be judged in the political realm rather than the courtroom. As to McKenna’s going along with other states’ attorneys general in seeking to have the law overturned in its entirety, Armstrong said the court lacked authority to second-guess whether it was a wise legal strategy.

In other words, Judge Armstrong leaves it to the voters of Washington to judge McKenna for his political lies.

by Darryl, 05/29/2012, 3:47 PM

DLBottlePlease join us tonight for an evening of politics, conversation and birth certificate scrutiny over a pint at the Seattle Chapter of Drinking liberally. We meet every Tuesday at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00pm, but some folks show up earlier for dinner.

Can’t make it to Seattle tonight? The Tri-Cities chapter of Drinking liberally meets every Tuesday night as well. Also next Monday, the Olympia, Yakima, and South Bellevue chapters of Drinking Liberally meet.

With 232 chapters of Living Liberally, including twelve in Washington state and three more in Oregon, chances are excellent there’s a chapter near you.

by Carl, 05/29/2012, 7:57 AM

- If you drove hundreds of miles out of your way for booze this weekend because of the transition between state and private stores, it may be because you’re a lush.

- Washington state politics are this fucked up.

- I think this sort of writing about race–and really about American politics–as though history doesn’t exist is a problem. Specifically, journalists are fond of saying “racism is only one factor” without realizing that any racism is unacceptable.

- I’m not saying the fact that Nickleback is Rob McKenna’s favorite band should disqualify him from being governor (that’s what his policies are for) but it’s certainly a mark against him.

- How the GOP is fighting for you.

by Darryl, 05/28/2012, 10:01 AM

by Lee, 05/27/2012, 12:00 PM

Last week’s contest was won by wes.in.wa. It was Tacoma.

This one is related to something in the news from May, good luck!

by Goldy, 05/27/2012, 7:00 AM

Leviticus 18:17
Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness.

Discuss.

by Darryl, 05/25/2012, 11:58 PM

Young Turks: Americans are fundamentally progressive says new poll.

Thom: The myth of the 1% job creator.

Sam Seder: Bigoted Pastor wants to round-up gays & wait for them to die.

Kimmel: Mitt’s first day in office.

Actual Audio: Mitt on Bain.

Young Turks: Barry Obama & The “Choom Gang”:

Thom with the Good, the Bad and the Very, Very Ugly.

Sam Seder: Iowa G.O.P. platform is insane.

Alyona’s Tool Time Award: Missouri experiments with execution.

A A rallying call for Democrats.

Susie Sampson’s Tea Party Report: Memorializin’ the War on Women.

Young Turks: Which Presidents have higher spending growth, Democrats or Republicans?

Thom: Why Joe Biden needs to blurt out a defense of pot.

Sam Seder: Rush Limbaugh gets creepy with 14-year-old girl.

Ann Telnaes: Pelvic Politics.

Thom with some Good, Bad, and Very, Very Ugly.

Young Turks: Pres. Obama is right about same sex marriage.

Letters to the President: Tanisha’s Story.

Pap: The worst Republican Party in history.

Sam Seder: FAUX & Friends nutty ideas about food stamps and the unemployed.

Stephanie Miller: Lessons Romney needs in education.

And the Drone Goes On:

Thom with Nick Hanauer: Is Romney a preditor?

Alyona’s Tool Time Award: Stigmatizing Poor People is Good?!

Roy Zimmerman: Vote Republican, Wisconsin edition.

Maddow: The Reverse-Robin-Hood Republicans.

Mitt Romney: Not a job creator.

Sam Seder: Heartland institute gets blowback over Unabomber/Climate Change denial campaign.

Alyona: Romney’s education plan FAIL:

Fred Karger for President.

White House: West Wing Week.

Obama and the fight for LGBT rights.

Greenman: How to talk to an Ostrich.

Maddow: Anti-abortion activists terrorize doctors in Georgia.

Thom with even more of the Good, the Bad, and the Very, Very Ugly.

Alyona’s Tool Time Award: Alabama doubles down on undocumented immigrants.

The Neo-Racists Birfers:

Buzz 60: Summer of presidential politics.

Obama speaks to Iowans:

Young Turks: Clinton poses with porn stars.

Ann Telnaes: Physical limits in Afghanistan.

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.

by Carl, 05/25/2012, 6:40 PM

Over at Shakesville, there’s the most amazing thing I’ve ever seen. It’s part of an announcement that you can enter yourself to win a dinner with Donald Trump if you donate a small amount of money. I can’t imagine wanting to have dinner with Donald Trump, but whatever. That’s not the thing that I find amazing.

Lots of candidates have that sort of thing. Obama has the same thing for his supporters.

No, the amazing thing is you’ll also win a trip from the airport in “the Trump vehicle.” I mean, I know he named most (some? all but The Apprentice?) of his business ventures after himself. Business people do that. No he named his car after himself. The only other wealthy business person who names his car after himself that I know of is Batman.

And he’s fictional. Also, he has the good sense not to call it the Waynemobile.

by Darryl, 05/25/2012, 12:33 PM
Obama Romney
99.5% probability of winning 0.5% probability of winning
Mean of 323 electoral votes Mean of 215 electoral votes

There were lots of new polls released in the two days since my previous analysis:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
AZ PPP 17-May 20-May 500 4.4 43 50 R+7
CA PPIC 14-May 20-May 894 50 39 O+11
FL Marist 17-May 20-May 1078 3.0 45 40 O+5
GA InsiderAdvantage 22-May 22-May 438 39.9 52.3 R+12.4
MD PPP 14-May 21-May 852 3.4 58 35 O+23
MA Suffolk 20-May 22-May 600 59.3 34.0 O+25.3
NC Civitas 19-May 20-May 600 4.0 45 47 R+2
OH Marist 17-May 20-May 1103 3.0 45 40 O+5
VA Marist 17-May 20-May 1076 3.0 46 42 O+4
WI St Norbert College 17-May 22-May 406 5.0 49 43 O+6
WI Reason-Rupe 14-May 18-May 609 4.0 46 36 O+10

The good news for Romney is that Arizona gives him a modest +7% lead over Obama. And Romney will need it, now that Secretary of State Ken Bennett (R-AZ) has concluded that Obama really was born in Hawaii. Although there is an occasional poll showing Obama ahead, the larger trend shows the state in Romney’s column:

ObamaRomney25Apr12-25May12Arizona
Other good news for Romney is that North Carolina has him up by +2% over Obama, and he takes three of the four May polls. The larger trend has favored Obama since late 2010, but things are clearly changing in the state:

ObamaRomney25Apr12-25May12North Carolina

Florida is up to its old tricks of bouncing between candidates. After being down -6% in the previous poll, Obama scores +5% over Romeny. The overall trend in FL looks more favorable to Obama, but that can clearly change:

ObamaRomney25Apr12-25May12Florida

In good news for Obama, we finally get the first poll out of Maryland. Obama has a dominating +23% lead over Romney.

Obama takes another Ohio poll with a +5% lead over Romney. Obama has now led in the last ten Ohio polls, dating back to late February.

Virginia gives Obama +4% over Romney. The recent trend still favors Obama in the state, but there is at least a hint that the state is swinging toward Romney:

ObamaRomney25Apr12-25May12Virginia

Both Wisconsin polls give Obama the lead over Romney, and solidify his lead in the state.

Today, after 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 99,494 times and Romney wins 506 times (including the 51 ties). Obama receives (on average) 323 to Romney’s 215 electoral votes. In an election held now, Obama would have a 99.5% probability of winning and Romney, a 0.5% probability of winning.

The probability is a slight improvement for Romney, up from a 0.2%. On the other hand, Romney’s expected electoral vote total drops from 220 to 215, as Obama’s increases from 318 to 323.

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
Read the rest of this entry »

by Carl, 05/25/2012, 8:02 AM

As I discussed a while ago, I’m sending out these questions to various Democratic candidates for contested races. I’m being somewhat more selective than I was with City Council where I just asked both people going on no matter how serious people might consider their candidacy. So no questions for Inslee’s or Cantwell’s Democratic primary opposition. Also, no Kastama since it’s Democrats only. I also didn’t do the 1st Congressional District since it’s being fairly well covered, and I didn’t do Superintendent of Public Instruction since it’s non-partisan and I may do some more of these for the general.

These will go Monday, so it’s your last chance to get something in. It’s the same question to every candidate, and it has to be fairly general, and since it’s email there won’t be follow up; if people give bullshit answers, you should feel encouraged to call bullshit in the comments.

Sec of State

1) How will you make sure elections are fair?

2) The last Democratic Secretary of State retired in 1964. What makes you think you’re going to finally flip that?

3) Sam Reed has been pushing to count the ballots that are received by election day (like in Oregon) rather than the ones postmarked by election day. Do you support or oppose this?

4) What legislation, if any, will you lobby for as Secretary of State?

Auditor

1) How will you use the performance audits as a tool to improve governance.

2) What in your background would make you a good auditor?

3) What legislation, if any, will you push as auditor?

36th and 46th Legislative Districts

1) The state’s paramount duty is education. Do you feel the state is living up to that duty? If not, what needs to happen to live up to it?

2) Washington State voters recently rejected an income tax. Most of the revenue that the legislature might be able to pass is quite regressive. Will you push for revenue, and if so, how will you make sure the burdens don’t fall on the poorest Washingtonians?

3) There is a good chance that the State Senate and/or the Governor’s Mansion will be controlled by Republicans after the next election, and certainly most legislators will be more conservative than people who would be elected in a Seattle district. Given that how will you get your agenda passed?

4) You’re running in a race with many Democrats who share similar positions. What separates you from the rest of the field?

5) Seattle and King County give more to the state than they get back. Part of this is reasonable things like the cost of providing education and social services in rural and suburban areas, but part of it is a lack of respect for Seattle and King County with the legislature that treats us as an ATM. How will you make sure your district gets its fair share of revenue without harming education or social services throughout the state?

…And they’re sent. I edited them a bit from when I first posted them.

by N in Seattle, 05/24/2012, 1:55 PM

Date of birth: May 24, 1941
Place of birth: Duluth, Minnesota
Name at birth: Robert Allen Zimmerman

In case you somehow don’t know anything about the man born 71 years ago today, here’s an eight-minute profile:

Whether he likes it or not, he is truly The Voice of a Generation. Dylan has created so many brilliant albums, so many wondrous songs … and he’s still out there playing music. He’s been running the Never Ending Tour since June, 1988 (that’s 24 years, folks!), and shows no sign of stopping.

I know, I know … no Seattle or Washington content whatsoever. Tough shit. Bob’s a special case.

If you desire more listening pleasure, click below to get to a few more videos (please excuse the brief ads on some of them).

Read the rest of this entry »

by Carl, 05/24/2012, 7:59 AM

- The Democratic Conversation.

- Rob McKenna’s time at the County Council was totally above board.

- On the one hand Hustler is misogynistic is hardly a story on the other hand yiiiiiiiiikes.

- This is quite old and I don’t remember who gets the hat tip, but this map of Seattle’s racial profile as of the last census is pretty interesting.

- Some of these are a bit of a stretch of either “Seattle” or “under $25″ but I can recommend many of them.

- Folklife is this weekend. The Flying Blind Blues Band at 2:05 on Friday features HA’s own Darryl.