Incumbents didn’t do so well at tonight’s 37th Legislative District Democrats endorsement meeting, with port commissioner Courtney Gregoire and city council members Tim Burgess, Sally Bagshaw, and Bruce Harrell all failing to win endorsements. It was a particularly poor showing for Harrell in his home district (well, one of his homes, anyway). Lorena Gonzalez, running to fill Sally Clark’s vacated seat, was the only council candidate to win an endorsement. It was “no consensus” for everyone else.
All in all, the 37th LD Dems displayed a lot of discontent with Democratic incumbents.
Of course, the headline match was between Socialist incumbent Kshama Sawant and establishment Dem challenger Pamela Banks—or rather, between Banks and the vote for “no endorsement.” The rules prohibit the 37th from endorsing any candidate who refuses to claim to be a Democrat, and that left Sawant ineligible for endorsement. So Sawant backers pushed for a “no endorsement” vote.
“No endorsement” led after three rounds, but not by the 60 percent margin necessary to win the day, so bizarrely, that led to a final “yes” or “no” vote on a dual endorsement for Banks and distant third, Rod Hearne. No crushed yes, leaving an official position of “no consensus.” (By the rules, a no consensus race can be reconsidered after the August primary.)
It was a victory of sorts for Sawant—a demonstration of her relatively strong support among active Democratic Party members. Establishment types like to soothe themselves with the idea that Sawant’s vocal support is a mirage: the result of the same 50 folks packing the room at every event, or something. But only dues-paying members and PCOs can vote at LD endorsement meetings. Sawant simply has a lot of support among rank and file Dems. And why shouldn’t she? No other candidate speaks more directly to Democrats on core Democratic issues than Sawant.
Yes. One of the stories we are not seeing covered because, Seattle Times and because publicola, being just rags at this point is the utter loss of confidence of the democratic activist base in the leading incumbents or insider backed candidates.
Tim Burgess has not gotten an endorsement by a Democratic Group yet I believe. The 46th rejected him, endorsing Jon Grant, the tenants’ union leader. Godden? laughable performance to date in democratic party endorsement contests. Harrell? Can’t get endorsed in 37th? WOW. throw on that clark rasmussen licata left, the net result is “the vote for districts was a solid rejection of the council at large; now we are seeing seattle start to reject the at large council incumbents one by one.”
A democratic party group blocking an endorsement of any of three qualified candidates such as Banks in favor of no endorsement a/k/a Sawant is incredible. HELLO DEMOCRATIC leaders — the message is start paying attention to economic issues like the minimum wage, and overall inequality. Sawant has done more for the economy, workers and middle class than ANYONE on the current council they all seem quite happy to have given developers so much, helping them bring in 20-30K high tech folks pushing out minorities of lower income and raising everyone’s rents to intolerable levels. And to see a democratic party group make arguments like “but she’s not a DEMOCRAT!!!!!” just makes some of them sound like the catholic church. “they’re not catholics! excommunicate them!” was the cry instead of “help the poor!” which ought to be the cry in the catholic church and the democratic party. and their silly rule you can’t mention Sawant, what a joke. Nice way to stifle speech, Dems. “Hey, let’s appear idiotic to the public, bound up with confusing silly bylaws that make no sense applied arbitrarily!” great way to reach out to the many members of the public who watched this show last night. And besdies, speakers against Sawant mentioned her by name so like anyone with a tiny bit of power, it was applied a bit corruptly, wasn’t it? What if Sawant could have been mentioned her name spoken and the mark on the ballot be for her by name no no endorsement? well maybe she woulda snagged an endorsement. but even so, you can’t imagine a bigger HEY WAKE THE FUCK UP message to bruce harrell, tim burgess and the mayor. I’d say even white buy Bradburd’s stength against poc Gonzalez in this district was remarkable, showing the insiders are not doing all that well. Gonzalez is the only insider (she quit as mayor’s attorney, to run) or mayor-backed candidate to get endorsed. Burgess, Harrell failing? Sawant blocking Pam Banks?
hello city council. Seattle activists are not happy with you. We’ll see if voters feel the same way.
NB: whoever built up this district did an amazing job, they had over a hundred folks voting, compared to just 66 up in the 46th.
btw, democratic endorsement do have a significant impact on voters. the democratic party groups often print up 10K or 20K sample ballots that are delivered noting the endorsed candidates and simply by being composed of say about 250 members and pco’s in each district, if you get endorsed by 4 or 5 democratic party groups you’re exposed to most of the most active talkers, activists and mini opinion leaders in the city comprising say 1,000 each of whom talks to 10-50 people. Also — candidates are going so to say this has little impact can’t be right, are they all wasting their time stupidly? it is true that the impact is only that of a leading bunch of endorsers and activists and their are others like unions, neighborhood groups, the seattle times endorsement the stranger and publicola endorsements the enviro community is strong, firefighters, etc. tons of winning candidates load up their mail with lists of democratic party endorsements and the candidates avidly seek them. so, it has more impact on voters than many other things candidates can be doing with their time.
if we pass the initiative for democracy vouchers, expect these grass roots groups to be even more important. someone like GRANT could match Burgess’ war chest if we had the democracy vouchers, grant would have no problem getting his $300K campaign budget just from vouchers. as it is, Burgess’ $150K raised to date compared to Grant’s what, $25K? may mean “Burgress’ money is more important than his not getting endorsed by the 37th and 46th” and likely others. Yes, and so what? that’s why we need to change things. But note Tim was sitting there all night as was Harrell watching themselves not get endorsed; for Harrell this must be shocking. Certainly as the election approached he amped up his anti cop rhetoric, didn’t he.
The sad unspoken reality is that these endorsements are pre-stowed by people who are second tier to the city bureaucracy. What we are seeing here is not a crisis within the democratic party, or even the electorate, but a crisis in the city’s bureaucracy and their ability to deliver contracts and grants to the same pre-approved recipients. In the final analysis, there will be no reform at city hall, but just a shuffling of who gets political favors–this is the basis for reform at Seattle City Hall historically. If low income people happen to benefit on a small level, then these are the scant spoils that will be doled out to prevent a real challenge to members in the the real status quo, who through their proxies, control the public’s access to candidates. Districting didn’t fix it and vouchers won’t fix it either. Journalists could, if they chose to report it, but that would freeze them out of a job or hobby as well. If this were any other city, we could call it what it actually is: corruption.
In Seattle Democrats like Burgess are just Republicans that know they have to run as democrars to win elections. I’m not shocked that the more progressive side of the Democrats are starting to choose other candidates.
This might start happening at the state level when voters start holding the Democrats who’ve been in charge accountable for under-funding education and creating the most regressive tax system in the country.
Godwin: don’t be so defeatist. Start working for change. If one believed what you think, no one would try to do anything to work for change. This is of course what the right wing wants people to do: give up. A better view is to not be so black and white. Seattle politics is in no way as corrupt as other cities or say, Russia, but is corrupt enough you ought to stop whining, get out of bed and start working to change things. Districts and democracy vouchers are EACH a HUGE step in the right direction, they’re not “nothing” and they’re not “everything.” We are seeing today the democratic base firmly REJECT the incumbents at city hall.
good. now we need to get GRANT in office over BURGESS. instead of whining, go call the Grant campaign and volunteer, okay? Things are not hopeless and they’re not polyanna wonderful; live in a world of complexity; don’t elate without cause and don’t nihilistically give up — both are forms of death. We got eco justice improved — not solved — with the min wage hike. Next issue is rent controls or stabilization and impact or developer fees plus public housing program. You want Burgess, Gooden, Harrell in control of that after they helped create the problem, I invite you to continue down the “let’s do nothing it’s hopeless” road — see, it absolves you of any effort or responsibility while you get to sneer at those in the arena from up in your easy chair in the stands doing NOTHING. the right wing has no better friend than your attitude.
@1, @4 – Yes, all the moderate Republicans in this state are “Democrats” now, because they were purged when crazies seized control of the WSRP in the 1980s.
I wasn’t at the 37th District endorsement meeting last night, so I’m not commenting on what happened there. But from time to time, some candidates will recruit a bunch of new members to the local party organization, folks who pay their $25 dues early enough to be allowed to vote at the endorsement meeting. They show up at that meeting and vote — and are never seen or heard again. It doesn’t take very many such new members to alter the endorsement outcomes.
@6 you are correct, the right pushed to the right and the left pushed to the right.
Sid Morrison and Dan Evans couldn’t win a Republican primary today. Hell Republican Governor Dan Evans was the last prominent politician to suggest revenue in the former of state income tax. that idea is left of Jay Inslee.
I think Seattle is desiring a little more liberal policy as it has seemed like most politicians have just been competing for the favor of downtown business interests at the expense of South Seattle.
@5 Oh, yes, let the pedantic shaming begin. Such positive energy there; political shaming is a component of group think. Good thing that the Democratic party does not define realpolitik in Seattle. Candidates are endorsed all the time who are later found out to be less then electable. Take a walk in the political graveyard and learn something.
No surprise except that I would expect Michael Maddux to get endorsed.
Seattle…Come for the Coffee, Stay for the Communism.
Mike @ 10 – LD 37 didn’t take up D4 (no cross-coverage). I have picked up the 46th and Young Dems, and will battle tonight for the 43rd!
Dear @9:
think skin much? this thing called free speech, it’s about folks actually disagreeing sometimes. in your world, you want to be above criticism and label disagreement as some kind of shaming? man up dude, get a backbone, don’t cry to mommy “someone disagreed with me!” if you can’t handle this level of debate, what on earth are you doing commenting on a public comment site?
what did the 43d do?????
did they endorse Burgess, Gooden, Banks, Harrell and Bagshaw and Gonzalez? the mayoral/sinderman team? you know, the “Murray pro developer Monarchists” team?
or did they go for Grant, Bradburd, Sawant, Maddux and Morales, the lefty populist neighborhoods and renters team? you, know the “People’s Popular Front” team? The jacobins/chartists/partie socialiste with a nice rose symbol type team, not in love with developers and not aiming to give them all they want?
btw that Banks, she’s really getting some huge real estate owner and landlord type donations, isn’t she. also megacorporate leaders are donating to her. so corporate, wonder why the 37th liked her so much?