Danny Westneat says that there’s a “buzz” coming from political newcomer Joe Mallahan in the mayor’s race. I haven’t met Mallahan yet, but folks I trust tell me he’s a personable guy and not a bad public speaker.
As it turns out, there was also a buzz at last night’s Progressive Majority fundraiser during Jan Drago’s brief speech, but unfortunately for her, it wasn’t coming from Drago herself. Rather it was the buzz of audience members quietly talking amongst themselves as they lost interest in Drago’s words.
I had the opportunity to meet Drago for the first time last night, and we had a lovely conversation… a much more comfortable conversation than I tend to have with elected officials upon first meeting, especially those about whom I haven’t always written kindly. I came away genuinely liking her, at least about as much as one can come away liking a person after a fifteen-minute conversation, and I can understand why her supporters like her too.
But after watching her less than dynamic performance in front of a friendly, alcohol lubed crowd, I have to stand by my previous analysis:
The dilemma for the challengers is this: how do you defeat a competent, scandal-free mayor whose values you share, and whose policy agenda you largely support? You beat him by being a better politician.
And that’s why I’m convinced that none of the challengers in this race, not even Drago, can beat Mayor Nickels, for as vulnerable as he is, and as grating as his style obviously can be, none of his opponents possess the force of personality necessary to get voters excited about change.
Drago struck me as likable enough and all that, but she just doesn’t seem capable of generating sufficient buzz to toss out the incumbent, however low his approval numbers. And while her 16 years on the council no doubt leave her well qualified for the office, it’s hard to see her dynamically selling the pitch to disgruntled voters that what we really need now is an infusion of old blood.
As for Mallahan, perhaps he really can generate that kinda buzz. I dunno. Then again, we tend to set an awfully low bar around here when it comes to exciting politicians, so perhaps he just comes off as buzzy compared to the rest of a less than exhilarating field?
Drago is slammed in the comment threads to this ST article about neighborhood parking. There isn’t a single comment in favor of the city transportation department, the city council, the mayor, or the city’s parking policies — but there are lots of angry ones. Sure looks like the city has a brewing revolt on its hands.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ng07m.html
gee Mallahan spends 15 minutes with a blogger and blogger writes about Mallahan and blogger can’t say what’s Mallahan for.
Not very buzz-y.
Drago is just job shopping after having tired of her efforts to destroy our transportation infrastructure in seattle. So Goldy, maybe she is pleasant for a fifteen minute conversation. But is she competent?
That “Times” article is a reminder of all the parking and infrastructure failures. No parking at light rail stations? What idiots thought that up? Oh, Nickels, Drago, and Sally Clark. Great planning.
Almost as bad as saying we will let developers build in our neighborhoods without having to provide parking so we push people out of their cars. Well, noooo, thats not what happens. Instead, more and more cars push parking out into neighborhoods and limits access for residents, visitors, and also for visits to neighborhood retail and services areas, thus cutting off the true lifeblood of what makes our city special.
The real question in this race is that with this demonstrated level of basic incompetence in running our city, (a C grade, Goldy? Really?) why didn’t we get a real challenger? We have four outstanding candidates for a much tougher job, and not one good challenger here.
Can we run a write-in campaign for either of the candidates who does not get out of the primary, either Constantine or Phillips? Both of them would be far, far better than any of these mediocrities.
Hell, I might have even considered voting for Goodspaceguy if he ran for mayor.
Quick, without looking it up, what the differences between all the candidates in terms of their positions?
Don’t know, do ya?
And that’s why Greg will be reelected.
Troll @4: Goodspaceguy has a different view of the issues. Colonizing outer space. I could draw up a list of people to send there to help us get started.
I saw Mallahan at the candidate’s forum the other night and thought he smart, positive, and articulate. That’s more than I can say for Drago or the grab bag of other candidates on stage.
A buzz? More like a monotonous drone…
“smart, positive, and articulate.”
But what’s he for?
Goldy thinks Nickels is competent!
He can’t budget and had to go to the voters to raise taxes in 2006 for road and bridge maintenance (“Bridging the Gap”).
He’s responsible for a financing plan for Sound Transit that’s costing vulnerable people and families thousands of dollars more than what their peers are paying for light rail.
He was the SMP’s cheerleader for a year at least after it became obvious the $150 million in taxes it would take in would be completely wasted.
He’s a huge backer of the AWV tunnel financing plan that he contends is illegal.
He’s not been able to guide the SR 520 project – it’s still a quagmire.
He’s made no progress on budgeting the $4 billion needed to resurface and repair I-5 through Seattle from the Ship Canal bridge to Northgate.
Nickels is a disaster. And he’s not facing ANY serious challenge. That’s because he has the judiciary in his pocket, and they’d punish anyone or any entity that provides serious funding to his opponents. Nickels’ friends assure the bench they’ll be reelected as long as nobody in a robe throws a monkey wrench into the financing of the grossly expensive and largely-useless “projects” Nickels backs.
Goldy thinks the guy’s competent though . . . .
All right, let’s step back for a minute and recognize that if Mallahan had not donated $200,000 to his own campaign then we wouldn’t even be having this discussion because he doesn’t actually stand for anything (he’s for the tunnel, demonstrated very little understanding of how city government works or what it actually does, and has a minimal record of civic involvement).
On the other hand, Michael McGinn has stood up and challenged the political status quo (NO tunnel!), has dedicated his life to our City and his beliefs (fighting RTID, leading the Green Legacy Coalition to develop and pass last years Parks levy, serving as the local Sierra Club leader, founding Great City and serving on numerous City boards, commissions and oversight groups), has a vision for our city and understands what it takes to get it done (better schools, improved transit service and technology infrastructure), and, most importantly, has a fast-growing base of dedicated volunteers (what really wins elections). He’s also got the whole “smart, articulate and positive thing going” as well.
Let’s start talking about the real buzz in this year’s campaign, Michael McGinn.
Drago: “change you can believe in”, if you want to wait ANOTHER 4 years.