I don’t put much stock into endorsements in general. God knows people I like have endorsed people I don’t, and people I can’t stand have endorsed people I really like. There are also considerations beyond policy that influence endorsements. So as I say, politicians endorsing one another don’t sway me, and I don’t think they sway very many people.
But when there are endorsements of that kind, I think it can be interesting to see how it plays into the narratives around a campaign. So as Ed Murray nears a quorum of the Seattle City Council endorsing him, I thought it might be worth considering one of the main narratives of the race: namely that Mike McGinn doesn’t play well with others.
Maybe he does, and maybe he doesn’t. But the City Council went out of their way a couple times to poison the well early on. Of course the City Council voting on the Viaduct replacement tunnel less than a month before the election was an attempt to support McGinn’s opponent, and to take things out of the hands of the voters. If they cared about making irenic gestures or whatever, they could have waited until the election was over. They were on track to have an 8-1 majority of pro-tunnel council members, so there was no need to hold the election then. They also repealed the head tax after McGinn won but before he was sworn in. That vote was 8-1, and it might have been 7-2 after O’Brien was sworn in. Again, they could have waited and negotiated with him if they cared about working with him, but with a veto proof majority as a backstop. Maybe a solution would have worked out and maybe it wouldn’t. But they didn’t even try.
Also, not on policy, but I went to several McGinn events after the election but before the transfer of power.* None of the City Council members who complain about how he doesn’t work with them made even a token appearance. If they’d have wanted to work with him in any meaningful way and not just butted heads, just showing up would have gone a long way.
None of this is to say McGinn is easy to work with or that Murray wouldn’t be better at that skill set. But if it was really the problem for Ed Murray that he claims, well, he would probably blame both sides. And, yes, I know that’s not how campaigns work: you go after your opponents, not the people who endorsed you. I just wish someone whose emails his campaign returns would ask him about it the next time he complains about McGinn not working well with others.
* If it’s possible, I’d like to shorten that time for City Council and Mayor. How about they can be sworn in the day after an election is certified? I’m just spitballing.
McGinn’s threshold problem is the perception he lied his way into office, saying he would not oppose the decision made on the tunnel and then on election trying to stop it.
Exactly Carl. Remember all the wailing and gnashing of teeth by the council (and the media) when McGinn called a press conference to propose a vote on the seawall? With no awareness of their similar attempts to screw him over, everyone was shocked that McGinn attempted an end run around the council.
Jeez, bitter much?
“But the City Council went out of their way a couple times to poison the well early on.”
By doing their jobs — signing on to the plan the state had decreed. See, a state is sovereign and a city is not, so State Route 99 could be eight elevated lanes through the center of the city, if that’s what the state government wanted.
“Of course the City Council voting on the Viaduct replacement tunnel less than a month before the election was an attempt to support McGinn’s opponent, ”
Of course it was. Everything they ever do is all about McGinn, and nothing to do with making good policy. It’s only a democracy if elected legislators do whatever a specific candidate for executive office wants them to do.
“…and to take things out of the hands of the voters.”
And what did we voters do, when asked to make that very choice? Do tell.
Um, nice try. But that narrative about McGinn is out there because it’s true. And it’s not just city council. Ask some of the people that were burned by him in the anti-tunnel campaign. Or the Sierra Club. The issue long predates his time in city hall or running for mayor, but it’s continued. It’s who he is. It was masked in the 2009 campaign because the city wanted to replace a mayor (Greg Nickels) for exactly the same behavior. (And then, because Joe Mallahan – remember him? – had no business being elected mayor.)
And so it is this year. The thing is, Murray isn’t much better. He also has a reputation in Olympia for being hard to work with, and for treating staff poorly. Funny how after a whole primary campaign that revolved around ending “divisiveness,” the two most arrogant bullies are what we’re left to choose from in the general. Funny how, just like the ability to raise huge amounts of money, that makes for a great candidate, but often not so good a mayor.
@4,
The post wasn’t about if McGinn is tough to work with. “None of this is to say McGinn is easy to work with or that Murray wouldn’t be better at that skill set” I said. My only point is that if it’s something people actually care about rather than just some anti-McGinn thing to grab onto, there would be more criticism of the City Council.
And while I think Ed has run too much of an insidery campaign (and Mcginn doesn’t work well with others is the insideriest of complaints) I do quite like him. 4 years ago I wrote that if he had run the write in campaign he was considering, that I would have supported him. Since then, he got marriage equality passed, so bravo. And I don’t blame him one whit, for Rodney Tom being Rodney Tom, and think that a lesser leader wouldn’t have held the line as well. I’ve also generally thought McGinn did better than I was expecting, and this year, I’m still undecided (although leaning toward McGinn). But that narrative in particular has always bugged me.
McGinn shows his view of his relationship with the council at the 3 min, 40 sec mark.
From Candidate Survivor Night.
Do you want to write about that side of the relationship, too, Carl?
@6,
Because again, the post wasn’t really about McGinn. It was about saying if you want to make that argument, you should probably look at it from both sides.
Yes, you should.
Did you watch the video?
Carl seem to be makinh Murray’s point. The endorsements from a rather divers group of council members, shows exaclty the quality that McGinn has failed to show … LEADERSHIP,
No one, including Carl, has been able to tell me what Mike McGinn cares about other than bike trails.
The man came into office claiming to be a person on convictions, IDEAS. After failing to sell his viaduct/tunnel agenda, McGinn mutates into the executive mayor .. a person who has learned a lot about administration but not much about leadership.
McGinn’s own literature brags about his fixing pot holes and submitting good budgets. Of course any mayor must do
I would also hope, however, to see a united city push on larger issues … school reform, getting Olympia out of micromanaging OUR budgets and taxes, planning for changes to Eastlake, blocking Paul Allen’s Vulture Realty from from tuning Lake Union into a wading pool for Vulture Inc’s hugh rises, revising codes to be sure we build high rises on transit routes AND provide ameniti4es bigger population will need, figuring how to stop the Seattle Arena/Stadium complex from eatng what bis left of Pioneer Square, Finding a Good Use for Pac Med, …..
Frankly, I do not know that Ed Murray can do these things either but a good start is showing he can work with ther city council.