Goldy and I believe the exact opposite thing about the possibility of Ed Murray running for Mayor. While I would absolutely support Ed if he decided to mount a write in campaign, I hope he sits it out. I voted for McGinn in the primary, although “for” is probably too strong a word: I voted against that self funded asshole, Mallahan. I wouldn’t say it was the strategic decision described here, McGinn did make the best case for the next 4 years, and was the least reflexively corporate whore of the pack.
Mike McGinn would definitely be a better mayor for the environment, and for public transportation than Mallahan. Less concretely, he would not feel the same sense of entitlement as someone who bought his way into the office. The liberal position ought first and foremost be to beat back Mallahan, and the polling shows Ed Murray in second right now to Mallahan; he’s probably taking away more votes from McGinn. Although you can ask the right questions and get Murray up to first, that won’t be how the write in ballot is worded.
So while I hope he sits this one out, I’ll also gladly support Senator Murray if he does make the foolhardy decision to run. While I don’t always agree with him, Ed Murray is one of the few politicians I trust in this state to have people’s best interest at heart, and he’s the only member of the Seattle delegation in Olympia I’d be sad to see lose a primary. He has been a real champion for education and for public transit, two things that the delegation is bad at in general. Of course his work on gay rights has been outstanding.
In November, I’d hate to both have Mallahan as mayor and to say I didn’t do everything to elect an actual liberal, so if Murray runs, I’ll do my damndest to get him into office. If not, it’s McGinn all the way. Still, I’d like to have someone to vote for, not just someone to be against.
Since when is grassroots organization the most important thing in politics, and why does being able to donate a specific sum to your own campaign make one an asshole? I presume the two are related in the above screed.
I’m fine if you can give evidence of ways in which Mallahan has actively insulted you, but right now your animosity isn’t as clear.
I do agree that it’s possible McGinn would be better on the environment, but still not sure if what he advocates for our future public transportation needs is the right way to go. I’m with Mallahan on the tunnel mostly because McGinn prefers to lie about it rather than honestly convince people about his position.
@1: Buying your way into office is NEVER a great way to do it. Grass roots means you have other people supporting you…not just money.
What is Mallahan’s public experience? Pretty damn limited…running the monorail and that is it?
The monorail? You mean that toy left over from the 1962 world’s fair? Please…. tell me there is some more public service somewhere….
and where does Mallahan stand on everyday working people (you know, the people he bossed around as an executive….).
Yah, Mallahan has a plan… to run Seattle like a business and to make his fellow execs happy. That is the ticket….a Nickels without a conscience.
Please vote FOR Mike McGinn. He has the political and public service experience that it would take to run the Mayor’s office. Or at least a helluva lot more of it than Joe Mallahan. McGinn is a genuine liberal and is right on the issues — and has been fighting for these issues for over 20 years, ever since he moved here to go to law school. McGinn is one of the most intelligent people that I have met. He will make a great mayor to lead Seattle into the future.
Being “for the environment” doesn’t mean much when you can’t tie your own shoelaces.
Murray is qualified to run a big city government. McGinn simply is not.
And Mallahan just comes across as an @sshole.
Hey number 1,
McGinn has been clear about his position all along. He favors improvements to I-5 and the downtown street grid and a big fat hairy investment in transit.
He has stated this publicly in the newspaper, on the radio, in blogs and to countless reporters who ask him.
He opposes the tunnel because it is both environmentally fiscally irresponsible and environmentally disastrous.
I have to disagree with you Carl. Neither Mallahan nor McGinn is particularly qualified to become mayor.
Mallahan is a literally a know-nothing. He doesn’t understand how city government works and anyone who thinks their experience as a senior executive in a corporation is adequate preparation to run a major city is simply deluded.
Whether or not you like the tunnel option for replacing the viaduct, the decision has been made. McGinn’s efforts to revisit and overturn this is exactly the kind of hackery that has kept Seattle a second-class city. I like his environmental record, but again, I don’t see a breadth of public involvement that would leave him ready to be mayor. He could be fine on City Council, but not mayor. Not yet.
Murray, on the other hand, has a long history of public accomplishment. As you pointed out, his record on transportation and education are very strong. Combine that with 15 years experience in public office and you have someone who is highly qualified to become the next mayor of Seattle.
@6
And I will disagree with all of you, and agree with the founders. See, the founders believed that private citizens should take a break from their life to give public service to the country, serve for a period, then return to their private life.
So no, you both are wrong. They are both qualified to be mayor of Seattle.
@2
I think you may have Mallahan confused with Port Commission canidate Tom Albro. Tom is the one who ran the Monorail. Mallahan has been a T-Mobile executive, Obama volunteer, and was involved in the Wallingford Wurst festival, that’s about it.
@6
I really wish people would quit calling the tunnel a “done deal”. First of all the financing plan is a joke, nobody has anywhere near the money they’ve promised to the project. There is no way tolls are going to even begin to make up the gap. Then, assuming the project doesn’t fall apart before then, we have the fight that will occur when the state tries to soak Seattle for the cost overruns (and there will be cost overruns). Second there hasn’t even been a draft EIS released for the project. We have no idea what the real cost-benefit is nor the actual impacts. There is also supposed to be a fair evaluation of all of the alternatives. Furthermore part of the purpose of an EIS is to take public comment on the project alternatives and their impacts. In theory these comments are supposed to have at least some influence on the selection of a preferred alternative.
Done deal my ass.
@ 8 writes:
First of all the financing plan is a joke, nobody has anywhere near the money they’ve promised to the project.
That’s not true. The state has the $2.4 billion in gas tax revenues, and it’s promised to kick in another $400 million in toll revenues toward tunnel construction costs.
Hey Chris Stefan – you don’t have a clue if you think this:
Then, assuming the project doesn’t fall apart before then, we have the fight that will occur when the state tries to soak Seattle for the cost overruns (and there will be cost overruns).
Read what the statute enacted last session says. The following is the Clibborn amendment. It is the guts of the new financing plan the legislature put in place for the AWV replacement tunnel project:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documen.....%20116.pdf
The “state” is not trying to “soak Seattle for cost overruns.” What that statute does is authorize a local government like the Port of Seattle to use a LID to impose annual assessments on benefited property owners. The costs WSDOT manages to incur in excess of $2.8 billion are to be paid by a subset of Seattle property owners (those within the boundaries of some as-yet-unformed LID).
You’re right about one thing though, the financing plan isn’t a done deal.
By the way – Ed Murray seems to be utterly clueless. Murray is the Senate Majority Caucus Chair. Before the vote on the AWV replacement tunneling legislation, he sent out an e-mail saying he doesn’t think it would pass:
Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle and one of the sponsor’s of the viaduct bill, said in an e-mail that he was against the amendment and didn’t believe it would be approved by his colleagues.
http://www.seattlepi.com/trans.....uct23.html
Of course it passed by a huge margin.
If he’s that clueless in his position of power in the legislature, there’s no way he should be mayor of Seattle. We don’t need an out-of-touch guy like that as mayor.
Can someone tell me how “Mallahan comes across as an asshole”? And nobody seemed to mind when the Kennedy family put its money behind family members who campaigned for office. Mallahan is not a Kennedy, so he had to use his own money. I would rather hear about how McGinn and Mallahan would lead Seattle government than attacks on their campaign finances (Mallahan) or message strategies (McGinn).
Can someone tell me how “Mallahan comes across as an asshole”? And nobody seemed to mind whenthe Kennedy family its money behind family members who campaigned for office. Mallahan is not a Kennedy, so he had to use his own money. I would rather hear about how McGinn and Mallahan would lead Seattle government than attacks on their campaign finances or message strategies.
There is a difference between being “for” something and actually “doing” something.
Candidates should not only be judged on their positions, but also on their potential to actually get anything done.
Ed Murray has gotten some big things done. Seattle needs a Mayor who can get things done, not simply tilt at windmills trying to rewrite history.
It is not clear that Mallahan or McGinn have the stuff to actually do anything except beat Greg Nickels, which turned out to be pretty easy.
3. Richard Pope spews:
Richard, do you really believe your endorsement is a positive??
After verbally clobbering and suing Gregoire…most folks find you to be (how do I nicely put it????) an enigma.
Yeah that’s it…an enigma.
If you support Mallahan, he is sure to lose.
Try that strategy.
Like what?
Husky Stadium??
Like what?
A smoke-and-mirrors unsustainable Budget TWICE??
Ed was pleased to underfund the State Pension Fund to balance the Budget.
I call that Deficit Spending.
He cannot pull the same tricks as Mayor cuz they don’t have these BS opportunities like Underfunding the Pension Fund.
Hi Carl.
I have a question: What’s the success rate for write-in campaigns?
(I have no opinion on whether Murray should run.)
Carl …
Great thread and it shows in great comments! Tx
If Ed had run, I would have enthusiastically supported him as a candidate.
As for M(allahyan)’s use of his own funds, I suggest you get used to this. Our system is based on someone with deep pockets financing campaigns. Even Obama had far more money from big donors than small donors.
The real issue with Mallahan is that he has run not told us anything about how he would accomplish his goals other than by being a good manager. Mayors hire managers. Mayors need to be politicians.
McGinn is less impressive to me than he is to you, but I have not met him. I worry that a number of his positions, even where I agree with them, have no “meat on the bones.” We have real problems and slogans will not solve them. I hope he will now tell us what he actually would do.
What Ed would bring to this is his intelligence, his experience as a politician, and a broad base of support in Seattle. This is pretty much what you are saying too?
The problem is that, in a three way campaign each of us would need to decide whether a vote for Ed was a vote against our second choice. For that reason I hope Ed does not run.
Assuming Murray does not run the M&M candy-dates will have to come out of their shells and tell us a lot more about what they really stand for.
That would be a unusual o0pportunity for citizens to make a decision.
The death of the traditional media would also offer an oppening to expand the influence of blogs!
Mr. Cynical @ 16
You quoted scripture in the Ted Kennedy thread.
Do you consider yourself a Christian?
(I ask here, instead of there, to comply with the request to keep that thread respectful.)
If you answer “Yes”… It’s kind of weird to be the one telling you this, because we’re not friends…
Christian faith and libertarian (political/economic) philosophy are incompatible, as in mutually exclusive. It’s a classic example of cognitive dissonance. It would also explain why you don’t make any sense.
Have you heard of the Bozo Bit? It’s a geek term. Once someone proves themselves to be a Bozo, there’s a one-way switch that gets toggled. And anything the Bozo says or does thereafter is ignored.
Honstly, me asking if you’re a Christian is a rhetorical question on my part. Your answer couldn’t possibly influence my opinion of you. If you say “Yes”, you’re on vacation from reality. If you say “No”, you’re a poseur (quoting scripture) and just trolling.
So you may safely choose to not answer.
Mr. C .. the SJ summary
To my surprise, mr. C is almost sensible here. He treat6es Ed Murray as if Ed were a real candidate and raises issues that would likely be campaign issues. Thes eissues also illustrate the problem Mallahan would have .. governing means makingpoliticla decisions. In Ed’s case, imaguine these debates from his opponents:
1/ Murray is a spoiler by running. He might come across as a leftish verskion of a Reprican, just say no?
This could be fed into conern for his supprt for the tunnel over the people’s choce (whatever that is).
2/ Murray curried favor with the atheltic dept at a time when the rest iof the UW was (and is) bleeding. … Are there more Husky fans in Seattle than there are folks concerned with academics?
If Ed Murray runs I will not support him. I will see it as crass political opportunism and I will never vote for him again, regardless of what position he runs for. He will lose my vote forever, and I’m a supporter and fan as of now.
If he wanted to run for mayor he should have ran in the primary against Nickels.
Maybe Murray running for force the other candidates to actually talk about what they stand for, esp. McGinn, who is a one trick pony thus far.
@22, I agree, McGinn hasn’t answered any questions on policy beyond “I hate the tunnel”. I’d like to support him but his website and answers to date have been lousy at best.
What hasn’t been talked about is that McGinn or Mallahan didn’t get a mandate at all in the primary. Over 40% of the electorate DID NOT VOTE FOR THEM. This is something everyone is glossing over. McGinn and Mallahan haven’t defined themselves to the electorate (most who don’t blog BTW) and that creates this opening for Murray or any other write in candidate.
If you want to know why Murray could step in? Ask Mike McGinn and Joe Mallahan; they’ve given him the opportunity.
@23 Cato
Good post! That summarizes what I suspect are the feelings of most voters.
I do disagree on one issue. McG HAS taken stands on issues other than the tunnel. I am sep supportive of his stand on the schools.
The issue, however, is where is the meat in a McGinn sandwich? Even more than the Tunnel issue, the Mayor has very little direct power to do much in the schools. What he or she could have is a bully pulpit. Norm Rice did use that and some tings got done. Hizzoner has not used that approach, at least not publicly.
McGinn is, in the terms we all love from the Republican Remnant, “only” a community organizer. But, that could mean a lot IF he has (as I suspect Murray does) the leadership skills to create calitions to get things done.
Frankly, this strikes me as the biggest concern for Mallahn as well. I suspect he would be a great City Executive, but he so far has shown no evidence of the organizational skills a mayor needs nor has he presented evidence that understands how vital this would be should he get elected.
______________________________________
I suggest an initiative.
If no candidate in a top twp rpimary achieves at least 37% of the vote, the vote will be re held in two weeks and restricted to the top four vote getters. Write in votes will be allowed but will noit be allowed in the final.
19. Jason Osgood spews:
I AM a Christian.
Am I perfect? NO
Are you? NO
But we are saved, right jason?
Look, screwing around with a bunch of hardcore Atheists (and virtually every one of your Fringe Lunatic Left brethren have confessed their Atheism…flat out/no doubt).
You go ahead and defend them Jason.
Spend a lot of time with them.
Share your faith with them.
See where it gets you jason.
I prefer conversing with Christian folks like Puddy…well-grounded in his faith.
re-read your post Jason.
Kind of harsh, isn’t it??
Especially since you don’t know me.
Seems like you are surrounded by God-hating Atheists spewing venom and you not only tolerate it…but seem to love it.
Explain that.
@10
By the way – Ed Murray seems to be utterly clueless. Murray is the Senate Majority Caucus Chair. Before the vote on the AWV replacement tunneling legislation, he sent out an e-mail saying he doesn’t think it would pass:
You have posted this a couple times and I just have to say that counting votes and not having enough of them at a given point in the session is not being “clueless”.
Was the email before, or after the amendments that moved it out of committee?
As it was, it passed 53 to 43 from the house on April 22, that’s 4 days before the end of session.
So, when he sent the email would be useful information.
SJ’s Mr C summary services
Fascinating, but he never says how he knows this. That is problematic since he also worries that he is imperfect.
Gosh, first there is doubt then the certitude not only about his own membership in the club but ,, I guess it is like Gadar? Can true Xtains sense each toher over the inet?
“confessed?” Really? Is that like on CSi?
I like Puddy too, I think he is a Christian (in a very good sense at that) but am not sure why you think he and you share a belief system? Do you have nay idea what Puddy believes?
Errr ahhhh ….
Van you please ‘splain to me how an atheist can hate an entity she knows does not exist?
Do you hate Santa? The tooth fairy? Zeus> Ganesh? Allah?
Speaking as a devout atheist I would pretty much hate a deity if I thought one had killed my mother in such pain. Since i do not believe that, what is there for me to hate?
Well .. I do hate Christians who hurt others in the name of Jeezus but unless you thinlk you are Jeezus, why would I hate him?
SJ, isn’t that rather unJesus-like of Mr. Klynical, to only hang out with those who are already saved?
@ 26 – The timing of Murray’s e-mail stinks. He wrote that e-mail after the Clibborn amendment had been adopted by the House. It was in the Senate up for a floor vote on whether it should be approved.
That’s when Murray said he didn’t think the Senate would approve it – yet it immediately passed by a comfortable margin.
If Murray wasn’t clueless about what his colleagues were going to do, then he was just being deceptive so his constituents who own property subject to LID assessments wouldn’t know he was selling them out.
Hey “Mr. Baker” – explain WHY Ceis, Nickels, Clibborn, Murray, Drago, Brown, Kohl-Welles, Eddy, and their bond lawyers all are insisting the AWV replacement tunneling financing plan is unenforceable, and somehow illegal.
It looks fine to me – do you think that statute is not enforceable as written?
@ 26 – Look, Ed Murray has no integrity. In that April 22 e-mail he says he’s against the bill after the Clibborn amendment is added to it by the House. Two days later he votes to approve it. You can’t believe Ed will act with conviction. That’s an example where he says one thing, and then does another.
Comment on that “Mr. Baker.” And tell us whether you think ESSB 5768 (as signed by the governor) is illegal, as all your best friends in political office assert.