Perusing the list of candidates who have filed for office this year, particularly in light of today’s stunning news in the Seattle Mayoral race, I ran across a nice, pleasant surprise:
Yes, that green arrow points to the name of one of HA‘s favorite commenters! Richard has run for office before … many, many times. For Attorney General, for King County Council, for County Prosecutor, for County Assessor, for District Court Judge, probably for other positions as well. This is at least his fourth run for a position on the Port Commission.
Richard is several steps above the crank perennial candidates like Mike The Mover (though you have to admire how he gets his business’s name in front of millions of Washingtonians for peanuts), Goodspaceguy, and Stan Lippmann. Richard has been an endorsed party candidate. He has come in second any number of times. In his 2006 race for District Court, he actually finished on top in the primary before losing in the general election — I participated in the recount of that primary, which entailed determining which of the other two candidates would face him in November.
Richard Pope may be the most cost-efficient candidate this state has ever seen. He spends little more than the filing fee, yet in his statewide runs he’s received about one-third of the votes. That’s literally just a few pennies of expenditures per vote. Contrast that with, say, Rob McKenna in 2012. According to Ballotpedia, he frittered away $15,135,367.82 and fooled 1,488,245 Washingtonians into voting for him. So McKenna’s votes cost him $10.17 apiece.
The incumbent in the No. 4 position on the Port Commission is Tom Albro, one of the corporate-shills on the Commission. He’s pretty colorless and quite invisible in the role. There’s no compelling reason to vote for Albro, and (IMHO) plenty of reasons not to.
Thus, unless someone really good jumps in at the last second — and there are only a few minutes remaining for that to happen — my vote for Port Commission Position No. 4 will go to Richard Pope.
UPDATE: Goodspaceguy threw his hat in the ring at the last minute. He’s running for County Executive, as are wingnut Alan Lobdell and someone called Everett A. Stewart. Who knows, maybe Goodspaceguy could make it to the November ballot!
I confidently predict that Richard will get 42.3% of the vote, like he always does. You read it here first.
Some things in life are utterly predictable: Rainy weather in Seattle, ConEd raising its dividend by 2 cents every year, Metro supporters trying to tax car drivers to subsidize bus fares, and Richard Pope getting 42.3% of the vote in every election he runs in.
All he has to do is figure out how to bump up his batting average by 7.700000000001% and he’s got himself a slot in the starting rotation. Hopefully he has put his crazy ex-girlfriend (his characterization)/stalking predilection (her characterization) behind him. The bar association reinstated his license (which he doesn’t need for this position), so either the WSBA’s crazy psychiatrist (his characterization) didn’t find him to be crazy, or if he did, the WSBA decided that’s not disqualifying. (Which I can attest to from my long experience as a judge, in which capacity I encountered plenty of — let’s say too many and let it go at that — crazy lawyers). Anyway, we all wish Richard the best of luck, and I’m sure he would bring a novel perspective to the Port Commissioner. We could hardly do worse than the present commissioners, so what is there to lose?
I used to think you had to be smart and sane to be a lawyer. I also used to think the words “prudent” and “banker” could fit into the same sentence. The world has changed. I’m fine with Richard Pope being a port commissioner. After all, we now live in a world that sends loonies like Michelle Bachmann and Darryl Issa and Jim Inhofe to Congress, so why not Port Commissioner Richard Pope? He couldn’t possibly do as much damage to the public peace as those folks, and probably not as much damage to our fiscal well-being as the incumbent port commission, so what’s there to lose? And, Lord knows, Richard needs a job. He’s not unemployed for want of trying. This is his twelfth run for public office. The voters should give him a break; he’s paid his dues; and it’s only the port commission for heaven’s sake. I don’t think winning this post will give him a swelled head; he’ll still get frisked at SeaTac like the rest of us.
Michelle Bachmann isn’t a lawyer. The “law school” she attended had it’s accreditation removed just a few years after she graduated. She’s as qualified to practice the profession as I am. She’s never ever once worked in a courtroom as an attorney. She’s never worked as part of a defense team, nor has she ever prosecuted a case. She is a “Lawyer” in the same way Mitt Romney is: On paper only. Her actual knowledge of the law is nonexistent.
Apparently, The White American’s Modern Bible© isn’t supposed to be a part of the ethics or Torts curricula.
@5 I didn’t mean to imply that Bachmann, Issa, or Inhofe are lawyers, although in fact Bachmann is (or was) a lawyer, whether we like it or not. Nowadays, the vast majority of lawyers never work in a courtroom, or have experience on a prosecution or defense team. Those are not qualifications for being a lawyer. A “lawyer” is anyone admitted to any state bar association, period. There are smart lawyers and stupid lawyers; good lawyers and bad lawyers. You can put various adjectives in front of the word “lawyer.” But a lawyer she is (or was; I’m unfamiliar with her current status), to the everlasting chagrin of those of us who take the law seriously.
This biographical sketch says, “It is worth noting that Bachmann did not take the American Bar Association exam, and was never licensed for private practice.”
http://2012.republican-candida.....graphy.php
But that doesn’t appear to be accurate. A New York Times article says Bachmann “passed the Minnesota bar” in 1986. But it also says that, during her 5 years as an IRS litigation attorney, she tried only 2 cases — and, “She did not practice law after that; today, the congresswoman’s law license is no longer active.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10.....rsity.html?
pagewanted=all
Her name doesn’t appear in the Minnesota Bar Association’s current lawyer directory. Unless she has an active license somewhere else, which seems highly unlikely, she is not a “lawyer” at this time. So, I would have to say that Deathfrogg is correct in saying, “She isn’t a lawyer.” She was, but isn’t anymore. She’s an ex-lawyer. Additional adjectives are optional.
Meanwhile, back at the original subject…
Seems the last time Richard ran for office, he got tired of the BS over on the right and switched party affiliations. Unfortunately, in spite of a golden opportunity falling into their lap, the King County Democrats didn’t do a damn thing for him, or else we’d have had Richard instead of Jean Hague on the County Council these last few years.
Four years ago, Tom Albro’s opponent got 42.32% of the general election vote, so I’m guessing Richard has a shot at breaking 40% again, like he always does. Who knows, he might even get 42.30%, although that could be a stretch. Richard is actually one of the more consistent candidates in recent Washington electoral history.