What with our local media elite’s fetish for splitting tickets, it was far from a sure thing, so I must admit breathing a sigh of relief to see the Seattle P-I Editorial Board enthusiastically endorse Bill Sherman for King County Prosecuting Attorney:
Every organization occasionally benefits from new ideas, perspectives and energy.
In a contest of two impressive candidates for King County prosecuting attorney, Bill Sherman makes the more compelling case. In Sherman, a Democrat, voters can pick someone who is well qualified, with diverse experience and possessed of a healthy interest in exploring new directions.
Dan Satterberg has argued that Sherman is unqualified to serve as Prosecutor, but he clearly failed to sway the P-I. I sure hope he’s more convincing in front of juries.
That said, Satterberg maintains a two-to-one money advantage, and that could be all he needs to win this election, so Sherman still needs all the help we can give him. With two days left in our five-day netroots fund drive, 69 people have already contributed $4,160. That’s well on the way toward our $5,000 target, but far short of our goal of 200 new donors — and nothing would be more satisfying than to blow through our goal with a wave of five and ten dollar donations.
So please give to Bill Sherman today, and help him bring “new ideas, perspectives and energy” to the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office. Thanks for all your help.
UPDATE:
As expected, the Seattle Times has endorsed Satterberg. The Times also bought into Satterberg’s bullshit “non-partisan” meme. Also not unexpected.
So there you have it, a hung jury from our two dailies. Both papers acknowledge that both candidates are well qualified — the P-I believes Sherman has made the case for change, the Times does not. All in all, a net-nothing in terms of changing the dynamics of this race.
My only question is, with this being the marquee race of the season… why did they both endorse on a Friday?
Given that the P-I almost always picks the wrong candidate and takes the wrong positin on issues, you think that this is, like, news or something???
Five and ten dollar donations cost ten and fifteen dollars to process and account for. They’re not donations, they’re drags.
What you need is to get all the well-healed HA regulars to pony up out of their slush funds. What with 2,000 visitors a day, that only 69 (an auspicious number pregnant with implications) have coughed up some dough is…also pregnant with implications.
The Piper
(click) It’s now 70 and $4,175.
I don’t vote for the party, I vote for the best candidate … but the best candidate always happens to be a Democrat.
Piper… yeah, I’m sure the Satterberg camp just shrugged off the P-I endorsement. They didn’t really want it, did they?
And ever spend any time in the real world? Using your numbers we’re already at a 3.5% response rate, and we’ll likely exceed 5% by the time we’re done. Find me a direct marketer who wouldn’t kill for that. And while you’re at it, go find yourself an experienced professional fundraiser and ask them what it means to raise $5,000 in a race with a $700 contribution limit? (Or $125,000 from 3,200 individuals over a weekend in August.)
@1 If you bother to actually read the P-I editorial, you’ll see their editorial board carefully and thoughtful analyzed the attributes of both candidates — and made a well thought out, well-reasoned choice.
P.S., the P-I doesn’t endorse the candidate they think is more likely to win, they endorse the candidate they think will serve the community best, and that’s Sherman.
Piper Scott @ 1,
“Given that the P-I almost always picks the wrong candidate”
No they don’t.
“and takes the wrong positin on issues”
Well…they do if your a fucking wingnut!!!!
“you think that this is, like, news or something???”
So who’s holding a gun to your head making you read the post?
“Five and ten dollar donations cost ten and fifteen dollars to process and account for.”
No they don’t
“They’re not donations, they’re drags.”
Well, the feel free to drag down Bill Sherman with a couple of $5 donations. Get all of your wingnut friends to join. I’m sure you can REALLY bring him down that way.
“What you need is to get all the well-healed HA regulars to pony up out of their slush funds. What with 2,000 visitors a day, that only 69 (an auspicious number pregnant with implications) have coughed up some dough is…also pregnant with implications.”
You could certainly help, by encouraging all your wingding friends to “drag” Sherman down with a $5 donation.
Go for it, Squirt!
@1 Most of us think your definition of “wrong candidate” and “wrong position” is both subjective and self-serving.
Goldy, you talked me into giving Sherman $15! I did it because of your efforts!
@8 That’s 1/8th of my pre-tax November 2 pollworker pay. I was going to spend it on carrots but I decided honest elections are more important than another 20 lbs. of carrots from Safeway.
Anyway, I can still buy 100 lbs. of carrots with the other 7/8ths (after Uncle Sam gets his). Yummy! I LOVE CARROTS!!!
Piper @ 1 sed:
Perhaps in a Republican world of accounting. Democrats seem to have found a way to be more efficient than that in their processing and accounting.
But as Darryl suggests, feel free to drag the campaign down with having to process a bunch of $5 and $10 donations. In fact smother them in such petty contributions. Think of it as a Republican denial of processing and accounting attack if you will. Sounds like a stellar idea.
Daniel K @ 11,
“denial of processing and accounting attack”
Hahahahahahaahaaahaaaaa!!!!!
Good one, Daniel!
Come-on Piper, take up the denial of processing and accounting attack.
Get all your friends on board!
The fishwrapper predictably endorsed Satterberg. Their editorial board points out,
“He was involved in all the big decisions Maleng made, including the Green River killer prosecution ….”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ted12.html
This is supposed to be a qualification for office? Cutting a deal with America’s most prolific serial killer to spare his life in exchange for the whereabouts of the bodies? (Think of the incentives that creates for every aspiring Ted Bundy or Gary Ridgeway out there.)
Rising to their customary level of disingenuousness, the fishwrapper’s editorialists seize upon a snippet from their lengthy interview with candidate Sherman to insinuate he’ll politicize the office:
“Satterberg’s opponent, Sherman, has argued that he will be no less nonpartisan, but that on some issues — environmental crimes, or as an advocate of banning assault rifles — he will bring a different perspective as a Democrat. We believe the people do not want a Democratic or Republican perspective on this office.”
Give me a fucking break!!! THIS IS A PARTISAN OFFICE!!! You run as an (R) or a (D)!!!
Of course, I understand what they’re trying to say … even though prosecutor candidates stand for election under party labels, the Times editorial board wants a nonpartisan, professional PAO. (Or, at least, they say they do — see below.) Well guess what, we ALL do. How does having a “different perspective” on assault weapons or environmental crimes make Sherman more partisan than Satterberg? As if Satterberg’s typical Republican attitude toward environmental criminals and assault weapons is somehow the “nonpartisan” position?
Like I said, disingenuous.
Exactly what you expect from a newspaper that thinks the most pressing issue facing America today is the inheritance tax.
I have a question for the Times editorial writers:
Where was your outrage when Bush and his attorney general politicized the U.S. Department of Justice, and misused the federal government’s prosecutorial powers for tawdry (and illegal) partisan purposes?
The P-I’s endorsement of Sherman for PA is the latest in a series of pre-election endorsements rolling out of their editorial room. The P-I’s position of Prop. 1 — the so-called “roads and transit” tax — apparently will be forthcoming later today:
“On Sunday we continue rolling out our endorsements. We’ll weigh in on Prop. 1, the Roads and Transit measure. (We won’t tip our hand here … but if you really must know, the editorials will be posted late this afternoon.)”
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.....123088.asp
Meanwhile, the P-I has come out against Tim Eyman’s I-960, saying:
“Initiative 960 is for anyone who likes their constitutionally established representative democracy only when it is hogtied, caged and strapped in a straitjacket. …
“I-960 is the creation of an aggressively self-promoting political enterprise that runs on distrust of elected officials and distaste for taxes. The latest measure attempts to box in elected officials more destructively than ever, under an overarchingly cynical attitude of us (the public) against them (our legislators).”
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/.....960ed.html
If You Build It, They Will Come (Back For More)
While we’re talking about newspaper editorial endorsements of various candidates and issues, let me add that I’ll be disappointed if either of Seattle’s daily papers supports the deeply flawed Prop. 1.
And … you should know that if this $38 billion measure passes, Sound Transit boosters are already scheming to ask for another tax increase:
“This week, [former Seattle mayor Charles] Royer said Sound Transit is far enough along to deserve Proposition 1 money for new projects.
“It’s an argument that’s already being made for yet another phase of projects, far into the future. One Sound Transit board member, Richard Marin of Edmonds, said that if Proposition 1 passes, construction should start early at the north terminus near Lynnwood. He thinks [that] would create support … to reach Everett with a ‘Sound Transit 3’ ballot measure … as early as 2015.”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....it12m.html
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Mass transit proponents are like feral cats: If you feed them even once, they think they live with you, and you’ll never be able to get rid of them.
PI endorses Sherman? That’s news? What the fuck else do you think the PI would do? Remain neutral? They’re a biased newspaper just like the Seattle Times and the News Tribune.
Al Gore wins Nobel Peace Prize…news at six.
VOTE FOR DAN SHERMAN!!!!!!
Ahhhhh ASSIE Voice: Whom else would the leftist Seattle Pee-In-Your-Eye call for? Hmmm…?
Running for PA is Bill Sherman,
Support from gobs o’ leftwing vermin.
With a nod from Hearst’s P-I,
He thinks he’s pie-in-the-sky,
But voters will leave him a squirmin’
The Piper
Ahhhhh, Terrorist, here’s a novel idea: rather than persistently accepting/rejecting statements or ideas based on who is making them, try accepting/rejecting statements or ideas based on the quality of the arguments behind them.
GORE WON!
More to follow.
Who will he endorse?
‘Lim’rick in the place
Where an argument should be
Republican shit
@21…SJ…
Look at his waistline…The Krispy Kreme man.
The Piper
@22…DJ…
As a Haiku-ist…you’re a walking invitation for another Pearl Harbor…
Don’t quit your day job.
The Piper
Too bad nobody reads the PI anymore.
@25…Jacob…
Some recycling centers won’t even take it, the content is so bad. Yet birds continue to enhance its worth by crapping on it when it lines the bottom of their cages.
The Piper
@25 But it’s not too bad that nobody listens to Faux anymore.
@27…RR…
Wrong again, rodent!
Per http://www.mediabistro.com/tvn.....5.asp#more
For Wednesday, October 10th:
25 – 54 demographic total day FNC: 256…CNN: 165…MSCan’tBSeen: 96…HLN: 110
Wow! Headline News beat MSNobodySees!
O’Reilly: 579…CNN: 200…Olbereverythingbutthetruth: 353…HLN…275
Total viewers FNC: 929…CNN: 496…MSNoBodyCares: 271…HLN: 250
Wow! MistakesSinceNewsBeganCrap barely beat out Headline News! And Fox whipped it nearly four to one!
O’Reilly: 2532…CNN: 558…MiserSinceNobodyButnetrootsCare: 898…HLN: 483.
These are Nielsen numbers posted at mediabistro.com.
Obviously, Rog, the rabbit ears on your set don’t get cable, so you might want to trade in the Philco. This new color TV stuff is pretty swell, you know!
The Piper
15 It would make one helluva lot more sense to add more Sounder trains to service Everett.
It would behoove each of you who hasn’t to real Joel Connelly’s column in this morning’s Pea-Eye. He suggests we remember that though Satterberg and Sherman have their differences (and he clearly prefers Sherman), this race is one of the increasingly rare ones in which neither candidate is a turkey–basically, we can’t go wrong here.
You have to give kudos to Joel for writing something positive after apparently spending yesterday with his sizeable frame stuffed into a coach airline seat.
@27…RR…
Check the ratings, Rog’, cause they’re 180 degrees in the opposite direction. I wrote a post with the cable news Nielsen numbers for 10/10, but it’s currently hung up in Goldy’s spam filter. Watch for it…
The Piper
Harrell and Burgess got both the PI and the Times–very hard to do so they must both really rock. This one’s harder. I’ll vote Democrat–or Republican depending on the day. Really is a coin toss.