Cantwell v. Washington State

WARNING!!! DO NOT DRINK MILK WHILE READING THIS POST!!!

2005-10-01T20:33:00.000-07:00

Unless, for some strange reason, you WANT said milk to come out of your nose.

Because all non-ultra-left-wingers will have extreme trouble not laughing at this.

Cantwell, the same Cantwell who set herself up as the poster child for the anti-ANWAR crowd, attacking Bush and the Republicans for not doing enough to keep us from dependance on foreign oil. The same Cantwell who keeps voting against nuclear power.

Oh, and she also called for investigating the oil companies for price gouging. In the same radio address. Which is very funny if you've, say, taken basic economics.

Tebelius Mulls Run

2005-09-27T18:51:00.000-07:00

Here's the King County Journal article.

Hmm. Interesting. I know Diane, and think she'd be a pretty good candidate, but I'm weary of a primary, and it doesn't look like McGavick is likely to get out.

Still, if she does run, which seems increasingly likely, it'll be a tough choice for me. McGavick seems good on paper, but he hasn't been impressive so far. That might change, however.

And Diane has the connections, at least as much as McGavick. She's more wired then your local Radio Shack, and I think she's better liked by the Republican base.

Well, it's certainly going to get interesting.

McGavick Caught a Break

2005-09-27T18:47:00.000-07:00

By not stepping down when he was going to as the Safeco CEO.

Here is Safeco's Statement about their post Katrina Business

I think that if Safeco does a good job of paying back those who were insured with it, and doing so in a helpful manor, which I expect, that'll be a nice TV spot for him, being able to talk about what his company did to help Katrina victims when he was CEO.

Am I The Only One Who Has Noticed...

2005-09-27T18:33:00.000-07:00

That, in the D's excitement over Bush's Low Approval Ratings/Congress's Low Approval Ratings/Supposed 'Tidal Shift' toward Dems, that they still don't tell you what they are for? We know they are against Bush/R Congress, but have they found any issues yet?

This sounds familiar to me somehow. They seem to think that people just hate the R's, and will thus, vote for them if they just smile nice.

Oh, yah, wait. I remember this line. They said it like this:

"America has already fundementally rejected George Bush. We just need to be an acceptable alternative to the unacceptable incumbent, and we'll win!"

Does anybody remember how that strategy worked out?

On, and one more thing...

2005-09-23T15:03:00.000-07:00

It is apparent that Reagan Dunn has beaten Steve Hammond in the Primary for the 9th District in the King County Council race. Matter of fact, barring some huge absentee ballot shifts, it looks like he beat him in a landslide.

I, for one, am glad about this fact.

I admit Dunn has been more then a little brash, and has made some rookie mistakes during his campaign. For one, even with the wiggle room he gave himself, he shouldn't have insinuated he wouldn't run if the convention didn't nominate him unless and he didn't intend to do so, and it was even worse for him to then say he might, but might not, and himed and haued about it. Now, before Hammond's supporters jump down my throat, KEEP IN MIND, that the ONLY reason the convention was held was in reaction to the 'top two' primary system, and since a judge struck it down, and nobody was expected not to run. So what anybody would have done if it hadn't is pure speculation, and is not a reason to like or dislike anybody.

Also, it seems to me, that Dunn was overconfident, and that he didn't seem to mesure the possible effects of some of his moves on the base, which I think he should have been more sensitive to.

That said, I'm still very glad about it for several reasons. For one thing, Hammond, while undoubtedly a decent man with solid beliefs and intellegence, has always struck me as a lot more of a cult icon then a truly effective politician. His supporters have been big on enthusiasm and short on logic in virtually every encounter I've had with them. Furthermore, Hammond's INCESSENT, NON STOP WHINING about the primary turned me off big time. I never heard him give a talk, ever, without saying, by implication if not directly, that the primary was 'unfair'.

Hammond seems like a decent, well-intentioned man, and I wish him luck with whatever he does in the future. However, he just never struck me as someone who could run with the big boys and actually affect any sort of real change beyond making a few disaffected people who really like 'outsiders' feel good about themselves.

Also, Reagan Dunn, in spite of his rookie mistakes, is the real deal. And not just because his mom was a Congresswoman. I was actually initially very suspicious that he was just trying to ride his mother's name into a political career. While she's certainly had some roll in getting him the right connections, he hasn't been like, say, Billy Tauzan III, who lost a congressional race for his father's seat in Lousiana in large part because he had no real experience. Dunn has been a sucessful Lawyer, practicing in a variety of ways, and his service on several presidential commissions among other things, have shown him to have the breath and depth of experience that few people his age have.

It always confused me that Hammond kept saying that he wasn't ever running for anything else during his campaign. That might win over a few non-political voters who don't like politicians in a general election, but it isn't going to help you much in a Republican Primary in a Democratic leaning State. We desperately, desperately need a deeper bench in Washington, and I have little doubt that Reagan Dunn will one day be a great candidate for Congress, Governor, Senator, or some other office that would be nice for our side to have. He has the talent, the looks, the connections, the charisma, and the drive to make it, and I'm sure he will one of these days.

I, for one, would sure love to see him run for Senate against Patty Murray.

Steny Hoyer: "We Get It."

2005-09-23T14:54:00.000-07:00

Dems finally figure something out.

Gee. It only took you losing 6 Senate Seats, 10 House Seats, and a Presidential Election.

Man, a couple of more revelations like this, and they can join Millard Fillmore with whatever he does with his free time in the annals of history.

Oh, and Steny, BTW, good luck with getting your base to go along.

Cantwell Still Under 50%

2005-09-23T14:43:00.000-07:00

Sorry I haven't been keeping this up well. I'm actually living in California. I am attending Pepperdine University Grad School to get a Masters in Public Policy. It's crazy busy, and I don't have a lot of free time.

Yet, due to a liberal blogging friend of mine over at Taggan Goddard's Political Wire, it has come to my attention, that Cantwell is A. Below50% at 49%, and McGavick is at 39%.

Wanna know the funny part?

They seem excited about it!

In reality, Cantwell being below 50, and her challenger, who has virtually zero name ID among people who aren't business/political junkies, polling at around 40, is pretty damn good. Especially considering it's a blue state.

If this were one poll, I might not give it all that much credence. But since it's one of several that says essentially the same thing, it's showing a pattern, basically, Cantwell isn't that popular, and once name ID and such is built up, any credible challenger will have a chance.

It's still going to be an uphill race. But not THAT uphill.

Let's put it this way: We have a much, much better chance of beating Cantwell then they do of winning in Arizona, Tennesee or Montana, which they keep squaking about.

Anyhow, due to my relative detatchment from Washington and time constraints, is there any readers who would like to help me with this blog? I'd be glad to have some fellow bloggers join me in updating.

Sorry for the long absence, but big news!

2005-08-10T22:56:00.000-07:00

I've been either really busy, or sick recently. It sucks getting sick in the summer.

Anyhow, a new poll has some VERY good news.

As I'm sure you all know, (sorry I didn't post on it officially) McGavick did announce for the Senate, and the first poll is OUTSTANDING for him:

McGavick: 38%
Cantwell: 46%

For the poll illiterate, that is OUTSTANDING news. I'm willing to bet McGavick has LOWER name ID then the amount of people who plan on voting for him. That shows a serious anti-Cantwell trend in the state.

Also, Cantwell is polling WELL under 50%. For a non-scandal ridden incumbent (that is, not counting her now questionable 2000 'victory' from King County), in a state that trends with that same party, no less, is very, very unusual, and shows her to be very, very vulnerable. If she were polling, say, 53%, and McGavick 32%, that would be more usual for this point.

Anyhow, it's much better then any reasonable person could expect a first poll to be for a situation like this. Cantwell is in for a tough year and a half, methinks.

McGavick All But In The Race

2005-07-18T15:58:00.000-07:00

McGavick Steps Down as Safeco CEO,

Saying he wants to 'Consider the possibility of public service'.

So that's basically it, barring him dropping dead in the next few days, he's all but in.

Good Luck Mr. McGavick!

Rumor Has It...

2005-07-18T12:15:00.000-07:00

That Fmr. Rep. Rick White will not be a candidate.

Good, I think he'd be a terrible one. He might be useful if he wants to run for his old Congressional seat though.

I'm thinking we'll hear an announcement from McGavick or Tebelius (hopefully not both) in the next few weeks.

Parlette is going nowhere, nomatter if she runs or not.

Cantwell Majors in the Minors

2005-07-17T23:43:00.000-07:00

Cantwell slams transfer of F-15s from Portland

The first headline Sen. Cantwell gets in a few months, and she's complaining about a few F-15's being moved.

It really seems to be her shtick. I don't know if it's intentional or not, but the only things she EVER gets into talking about are things like this.

I am aware that good governance requires fighting over details like this, but this one just seems downright stupid. It's like Michael Moore complaining that there is only one State Trooper guarding the Oregon Coast, hoping people won't realize that the reason for that being...uhh...is that we have this wonderful little group called the 'COAST GUARD' that guards the coast. The real question is, why would even one State Trooper pay attention to the coast?

In the same fashion, a few F-15's in Portland, overlooking other types of defenses, be they Air Force, Navy, Army, Marines, or Coast Guard, is just flat out stupid. Does anybody actually think that moving a few F-15's from Portland to Lousiana is going to many anybody less safe?

Even if she was right, and on it's face, her complaint just seems silly, do you really want to run for re-election on 'Well, I saved a few F-15's in Oregon from moving to Lousiana,"?

I know I wouldn't want to.

Long Overdue Update Caused by Big News

2005-07-15T15:41:00.000-07:00

There are two pieces of big news today:

A. Rossi Won't Run For Senate

Oh, gee, like, DUH.

Weren't the Thank You notes he sent out to all his doners and volunteers that said "Paid for by Rossi for Governor '08" at the bottom enough for people to get the message?

But that said, now that it is 100% official, I expect announcements to come shortly from other candidates. I am expecting that Diane Tebelius will run if Mike McGavick doesn't, I'm not sure if he does. Either way, look for once of them to announce soon.

Also, State Sen. Linda Evans Parlette from Wenachee has been making some noise about running. That said, I don't take her possible run seriously. She's all wrong on just about every front. She's A. From the wrong side of the mountains, B. Low profile, from a small office and C. Pro-choice. She is obviously trying to make her pro-choiceness a selling point for the minority of pro-choice republicans, but she'll alienate a larger section of them, and results show that rarely does a pro-choice Republican beat a Democrat on that reason alone.

Also, a cell-phone mogul who's name I can't remember is considering running. Again, I don't expect them to be a major player unless McGavick and Tebelius both say no.

Second piece of big news:

B. Judge Strikes Down Top-Two Primary

Thank GOD. The top-two primary was an abomination to anybody who believes in A. Freedom of association, B. The right of diverse parties to be represented on the ballot, C. People who just believe in good government.

Anyhow, I don't see it having a terrible lot of effect on the Senate race at this time, but it's important for our state not to turn into a national joke aka Lousiana.

Beyond that, Cantwell has kept a low-profile. I saw her on TVW a few times speaking to various groups in the past few weeks. Still pretty boring, but she looks amazingly smart and accomplished in comparison to good-ole Patty. We shouldn't mistake her for a leightweight, she's not.

Cantwell Was One of the 18 Who Voted Against Cloture on Owens

2005-05-25T11:05:00.000-07:00

So was Murray.

Just thought I'd let you know.

Cantwell's Love Life

2005-05-24T19:39:00.000-07:00

Although from what I understand, Cantwell has had a very colorful dating life in her past, it is not my intention to dissect her personal life, nor try to score political points about it.

But this is just too weird/funny/interesting to completely ignore:

Looks like Torch has a new flame in Wash. senator

Has "The Torch" been passed to yet another lovely lady?

I'm referring, of course, to former Sen. Robert Torricelli (D-N.J.), who earned his fiery nickname by dating an impressive array of beautiful women, including Mick Jagger ex Bianca Jagger and Ronald Perelman ex Patricia Duff.

The other night, the Torch - who has worked as a business consultant since dropping his bid for re-election under an ethical cloud in 2002 - was spotted having a cozy dinner at the posh D.C. Italian restaurant Galileo with Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), an eligible bachelorette.

"They were sitting together at a prominent table, and they were all over each other," said a Lowdown spy. "They were touching, and it looked like they were on a date."

The spy added that midway through the meal, who should enter the restaurant but Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who came back from Senate retirement to take Torricelli's vacant seat.

"Lautenberg just looked at their table and glared," said the spy.

Yesterday, the 53-year-old Torricelli didn't respond to my detailed messages, but an aide to the 46-year-old Cantwell told me: "Yes, we can confirm that Sen. Cantwell did see both Torricelli and Lautenberg at Galileo, but it was not a date. Cannoli is not the same thing as canoodling."

____________________________________________________

It's an...interesting choice of a date.

Anyhow, I'm not going to make something out of nothing, and I am in no way saying I think she is doing anything wrong at all, but it is interesting that she's apparently not afraid to be seen with him given how he was driven out of the Senate. It's either a sign of strenght or stupidity.

Sorry for the boredom.

2005-05-21T22:08:00.000-07:00

There really hasn't been much going on, Cantwell is one of the worlds most boring senators. She's never really doing much of anything. Other then taking the high-profile on the ANWR fight, she's basically played everything completely safe. It's both her strength and her weakness. It seems if she can be labled a 'do nothing' Senator, it might help.

I have heard from reliable sources that Diane Tebelius is strongly considering running, and I think she would be one of the best non-Rossi candidates out there. She'd nullify the woman advantage, and can raise funds like mad. Anyhow, I should reveal that I know Diane personally, so anything I say about her may be biased, just thought I should say that.

I just hope that everybody plays nice and there is no primary. I think Mike McGavick would make an equally good candidate at least. It'll be interesting to see if he jumps in.

There is a poll floating around that shows Cantwell getting thumped by Rossi. I tend to think it might not hold up, as I said earlier, he won the Governors mansion twice by downplaying things he wouldn't be able to downplay in a Senate race. And besides, he won't run. He wants to be Governor, and one day, he will be.

State Dems 'Go Nuclear'

2005-04-16T11:26:00.000-07:00

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002243212_spendlimit16m.html

House votes to ease way for taxes

By Andrew Garber

Seattle Times Olympia bureau
E-mail article
Print view
Search
Most e-mailed
Most read
RSS

OLYMPIA House Democrats yesterday cleared the way for tax increases by passing a bill that would let lawmakers raise taxes with a majority vote instead of the two-thirds vote now required.

Senate Bill 6078 would suspend part of Initiative 601, the spending-limit measure Washington voters approved in 1993, and make it possible for Democratic majorities in the state House and Senate to raise taxes without Republicans going along. It passed 50-43, with four Democrats siding with Republicans and voting against it.

The bill fell one vote short on its initial vote in the House but passed on reconsideration after Rep. Dawn Morrell, D-Puyallup, said she had mistakenly voted "no" the first time.

The measure, which also would make several changes to the state's spending limit, was amended in the House and now returns to the Senate. Senate Democratic leaders have indicated they will accept the House version.

Democrats argue the bill would improve I-601 and is needed to pass a "responsible" budget. "It's the responsibility of the majority to govern," said Rep. Jim McIntire, D-Seattle.

Republicans say the move is not needed and essentially would gut the initiative. "This is the most fiscally irresponsible bill," said Rep. Gary Alexander, R-Olympia.

Democrats in both the House and Senate have proposed $26 billion budgets that represent about a 12 percent increase in spending over the current two-year budget.

And both chambers have proposed tax-increase packages that would bring in around $480 million over the next two years. They include taxes on cigarettes and liquor and bring back an estate tax. Gov. Christine Gregoire's $25.8 billion budget proposal had a smaller tax package.

Lawmakers have slightly more than a week left in the regular session to work out their differences and approve a budget. Democratic leaders in both houses predict the Legislature will get out on time.

Republicans have argued the Legislature should be able to write a budget without increasing taxes, and that the I-601 restrictions should be kept in place. "The only reason they're [suspending I-601] is so they can raise taxes," said Rep. Mike Armstrong, deputy GOP leader in the House.
It's not the first time I-601's requirements have been suspended to make it easier to raise taxes. Democrats did the same thing in 2002 when they controlled both Houses.

The initiative "is completely meaningless if every time they need to raise taxes they just suspend it," Armstrong said. "If the Legislature is going to continue to suspend it, then take the hard vote and tell people you want to do away with I-601 completely. They won't do that because that's a tough vote for everybody."

SB 6078 would make other changes to I-601, which was aimed at limiting government spending.

One of the most significant provisions, which would take effect in two years, would let state spending grow at a faster rate than the initiative envisioned.

I-601, in addition to requiring a two-thirds vote to raise taxes, limited the annual growth in state spending to the average rate of increase in the state population and inflation during the past three years.

SB 6078, beginning July 1, 2007, would base the spending limit on a 10-year average of state personal-income growth, which would allow spending to grow around 2 percent faster than it now can. Given the size of the state budget, 2 percent represents a lot of money in this case, several hundred million dollars.

Andrew Garber: 360-943-9882 or agarber@seattletimes.com

Other then the obvious interests of Washintonians in this, I would REALLY like to hear how Cantwell will answer this question:

"Senator Cantwell, do you support the efforts of your party in the State House and Senate to have a majority rules vote on taxes?"

(she'd undoubtedly either say yes or dodge the question, but assuming she answered it:)

"Interesting. You voted against allowing a up or down vote on President Bush's judicial nominees, and you voted against changing the rules so a majority could confirm then. The rule in question was not something that was voted on by the public, or was not created by the founders of this country, but just by the Senate in the 1800's sometime. Meanwhile, I-601 was passed by a majority of the people of Washington. Why is it you feel that one is OK and the other is not OK?"

She'd probably duck the question, and so it would never get to that point. But the hypocrisy on the part of the D's in general on this one is deafening.

Missed this:

2005-04-04T20:04:00.001-07:00

Cantwell sets town-hall session on Social Security for tomorrow

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002224397_cantwell30m.html?syndication=rss

I somehow missed this, which is a shame, I would have liked to have gone to this.

This isn't terribly informative, that Cantwell is going to play the 'Problem? What problem?' card on Social Security is not news.

I did, however, find it interesting that she's brining in Mary Landrieu and Barbara Mikulski to help her though. It could mean a lot of things, many of which aren't terribly meaningful, but it seems a bit odd for Senators from other states to visit for a 'town hall' session so far away from an election.

I doubt it'll matter much one way or another, and Landrieu would probably be popular in this state, but I don't think Mikulski helps her image as a moderate problem solver. I can't imagine that helping her with folks from any of the 'Red' areas, let alone swing counties like Snohomish, Pierce or Clark.

Good God...

2005-04-01T16:15:00.000-08:00

OK, yes, this blog is about Cantwell in '06, but I am interested in other things as well, and this statement by Senator Bill Nelson of Florida is so MIND NUMBINGLY insensitive and trite it's difficult to describe:

http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050401/NEWS01/504010331/1006

Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Melbourne, said he will remember that "this quiet, shy woman who shunned the spotlight educated everyone on the importance of filling out a living will."

She DIED to remind people to have living wills?

Good grief, I know Nelson is trying to straddle the fence on this, but this is a bit ridiculous, not to mention just insensitive and crude.

In effect, her dying may well cause people to think about their living wills, but she died because her husband decided her life wasn't worth living. It's fine if you agree with his decision, but good grief, this statement is just insulting.

Larry Sabato agrees:

2005-03-31T23:21:00.000-08:00

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/31/113010.shtml

A good, very brief overview of the '06 Senate races, but the interesting part for Washington State comes when he says:

"Maria Cantwell (D-WA) is also vulnerable, not least because of GOP anger over a 'stolen' Governor's election in 2004; however, Washington leans Democratic and the Republicans have not yet lined up an impressive candidate to carry the banner against Cantwell."

Which is basically what I've said. I feel good that he agrees with me though, Sabato is a good analyst.

Anyhow, in the meantime, Cantwell is a little late on the bandwagon, but she's making noise about wanting to curb ID theft and linking it in part to the meth problem in the state. I guess it worked well enough for Rob McKenna in the AG race and Dave Reichert in the 8th Congressional race, so she's getting on the 'more funding' bandwagon.

It may well be that more funding is necessary to fight ID theft and meth, I'm not well versed in the funding of law enforcement, but it does say something to me that she's jumping on this bandwagon NOW, after it had been brought up so publicly by McKenna and Reichert.

BTW, I went to King County Councilwoman Kathy Lambert's kickoff breakfast a few days ago, and heard McKenna speak. He's already getting better then he was in his campaign in my opinion. I think bigger things are in store for him in the future, just not this time.

More Interesting Challengers, and ANWR

2005-03-20T21:36:00.000-08:00

Cantwell decided to take the quarterback position on the ANWR debate, and lost.

http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=communique&newest=7934

She's making noises that the fight 'isn't over yet', but it probably is. They will make more noise about it, and it might need to come up for another vote if the budget is in trouble, but I seriously doubt the pro-ANWR people will lose two of the 51 Senators who voted for it.

It's an interesting position to take a high-profile stand on, and a risky one, but it's not necessarily a bad one. Washington has traditionally been supportive of the environmental lobby and I think this will probably help her here. I'd like it not to be so, but I do think it is so. She will have an easier time selling herself as the champion of the environment, and as of yet, that's a big help in Washington.

As someone who is a genuine moderate, or, more accurately, someone who believes there is a third way, (if you can find it, WSU Professor Ed Weber has some excellent writings on a different sort of theory on Environmental management, I have not yet been able to find them online), it's a shame that the debate comes down to pro-environment/anti-environment, but unfortunately, for now, it does, and Washington trusts the environmental lobby machine, (which I find increasingly surprising, I kind figured they would take a hit with the mass forest fires in California and Montana, it seems difficult to argue that the kind of environmental absolutism didn't cause these problems) and I think it'll help her.

Just to explain where I stand: I'm moderately pro-ANWR drilling. I think in this case, it's a good thing, and there is no way it'll have a significant environmental impact on an area the size of South Carolina, but the precedent of a conservation area suddenly being opened because we found something valuable on it causes me to have some concerns, but in this case, I think that responsible, well managed drilling would be fine, just so long as we take it on a case-by-case basis.

Anyhow, some more candidates have been getting buzz as potential challengers:

Washington State Republican Chairman Chris Vance

Vance has been the State Chairman since 2001, and was just recently re-elected easily, although it wasn't thought to be the case at first. Vance has proven to be somewhat controversial, and been accused of being somewhat heavy handed in enforcing who's running for what, but he has done good work in my eyes. In 2004, he kept the two open congressional seats, won the AG's office, and won, won, lost the Governor's Mansion, and has done good work with building party structure. He's had his share of losses too, we lost control of the State Senate for example, but we wouldn't even have controlled it had he not won it two years earlier, and it's important to keep expectations realistic, we are a blue state afterall, but I think he's overall been an effective chair.

Before being elected State Chairman, Vance was a two-term State Representative, and a two-term King County Councilmember in a district that is now a Democrat district, and Vance won his last election with near 60% of the vote if I'm not mistaken . Also, he lost the 2000 9th Congressional Race to Adam Smith.

Anyhow, he mentioned in an interview recently that he would 'consider running' if the right people in the party asked him to, although he said he thought Rossi should if he didn't get a revote. (Mary Lane, Rossi's spokeswoman, said he 'would never do that,' but I'll believe that when and if he doesn't get a revote.)

Vance could be a good challenger. He has the right connections, and clearly knows a thing or two about campaigns. His wins for King County Council prove that. He won his races big, and State Sen. Pam Roach, who ran to fill his seat, lost big. He's decent with the press and could almost instantly get a campaign off the ground.

He did lose the 2000 9th Congressional race, but frankly, Adam Smith is a tougher opponent then Cantwell, and 2000 was a horrible year for R's in this state, and I don't expect 2006 to be.

Vance doesn't have the sort of charisma with people that Rossi does, and I also fear that his high-profile partisan position won't help him in this state. Party bigshots can go on to high elected office in other states, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell for example, but it's not all that common, and our state seems to like the myth of 'independence', nomatter if it exists or not, and it's harder to sell that image as a party chairman.

I doubt he will end up running, but if he does, it'll certainly be interesting. I'd take a wait and see attitude toward him as a Senate candidate.

Safeco CEO and Chairman Mike McGavick

I'll admit, I didn't know who this guy was when I first heard about him, but reading up on him a little makes him a very interesting candidate, even a potentially exciting one.

McGavick has been a widely celebrated CEO and a very successful businessman, but is no stranger to politics. He managed Slade Gorton's 1988 campaign, and served as his Chief of Staff from 1989-1991.

That means he's got the resume and the political know-how without having any of the baggage that being a longtime office holder does. Potentially, that could be very good. Also, I don't know how much of his own money he would be willing to spend on his campaign, but he certainly could help his own cause if he had the mind to.

Wealthy businessmen (or women) have a mixed record when it comes to running for high-office. They certainly can win, they did quite well in 2000. Democrat Jon Corzine won easily in the very blue (at least in 2000, it turned much more purple in 2004) New Jersey, and Democrat Mark Dayton won a close but decisive victory in Minnesota the same year (he had run previously and lost), and of course, Maria Cantwell (who is in a somewhat different camp being a former Congresswoman) won her incredibly narrow victory here. However, in 2002, I don't know of any who ran for statewide office, and in 2004, both Democrat Erskine Bowles in North Carolina, and Republican Pete Coors in Colorado, lost close elections. (Coors lost 50-48, while Bowles lost 52-48). It seems as if it might be an advantage to be a Democrat and wealthy, perhaps the 'Wealthy Republican' fits too much into the stereotype, but it's hardly impossible, and Cantwell is the only precedent in Washington that I know of.

Anyhow, he's certainly one to watch.

So, where does this leave us: The (potential) Challengers:

2005-03-11T21:41:00.000-08:00

What I think the past has told us about Washington, that for Republicans to do well in this state, one of two things has to happen:

1. The voters have to be REALLY mad at Democrats (i.e. 1994)
2. Republicans have to have attractive, non-threatening candidates who at least 'appear' moderate.

I don't think anybody will debate me on the first one.

The second one takes a bit more explaining. What exactly does 'non-threatening' and 'appear moderate' mean?

Well, I think by 'non-threatening', they need to be people that can get along with folks in the Seattle Metro Area. Not necessarily agree with, or share many things with, but they can't be a threat to them.

Ellen Craswell, Linda Smith, John Carlson, etc. These folks felt threatening to those in the Seattle Metro Area. As many politicians have found out, usually too late, about the South, it doesn't even matter if you agree on every issue, if you aren’t 'one of them' if they sense that you don't understand them or their lifestyle, they won't vote for you, especially if you aren’t of the party they generally associate with. The same is true in reverse in the Seattle Metro area.

The Seattle Metro area is culturally different from the rest of the state. It's not quite the San Francisco of the Pacific Northwest, but it's not that far off. It is heavily secular, single, and filled with people that fit in with the 'blue state' culture. They usually work in office jobs; enjoy hanging out in coffee shops, going to festivals, living the 'city' life, etc. They don't have much interest in 'red state' sorts of things. They sometimes live in the suburbs and have kids in their later life, but that's usually not where they grew up, culturally if not physically.

It isn't necessary that you have to live like these people to win enough of them to win a statewide election, but it is important that you don't antagonize them. I doubt many Seattle liberals are going to vote for whomever the Republicans nominate, but they do need to win over some of the Seattle liberals friends and relatives, those who live in the suburbs around Seattle and in Snohomish and Pierce counties, and if you are perceived as too threatening, then you mine as well kiss your chances goodbye.

Gorton was the poster child for 'non-threatening' as is Rob McKenna. That was also part of their weakness, in that neither are terribly engaging either, but it's a style that can work. They are also of the moderate wing of the party. Some right-wingers blame Gorton's 2000 loss on being too moderate, which, given the 65,000 votes for the Libertarian candidate, has at least some credibility, although I'm not 100% convinced he wouldn't have lost many of those votes on the other side.

Then there is Dino Rossi. Dino Rossi is a different case. He has some of the same 'non-threatening' elements as Gorton, seen as more of a technocrat, concerned with 'good government', not radical right-wing change, but at the same time, he is very engaging, full of smiles, laughs, and with the ability to charm a crowd.

In other words, a true salesman.

The funny thing about Rossi, and one his opponents noticed, there really isn't all that much difference between his politics and John Carlson's. Oh sure, there might be a few minor issues, and Rossi hasn't made public statements on everything under the sun that can be worked against him, but his politics are mainstream, but solidly conservative. It is merely his 'style' that is moderate. That is very important.

So, to win, we need a candidate who can balance these things, as well as raise the funds, have the connections, have the resume etc. Who's out there?

Potential Challengers:

Frm. State Senator, Frm. Governor-Elect Dino Rossi

A man who needs no introduction.

Obviously, as my last post proved, Rossi is the biggest threat to Cantwell. He is charismatic, well known, well connected, and has proven he can win statewide, even if he later loses. Keep in mind; Dino was nobody before the Governor's race. A State Senator who nobody other then political geeks and folks from the Olympia crowd knew, and he at worst lost by .000001% against a 3 time Statewide Office holder in a liberal state. Quite a feat.

Also, most of the state believes he is the legitimate winner of the Governor's race. It is still above 55% last poll I saw. And people are mad about it. It would work in his favor.

However, it isn’t' as easy as it looks. There are a ton of problems with this.

The first is obvious: Dino, twice elected Governor, and once defeated, only to not take office, is still pressing for a re-vote. Read all you want about it at if you want more info. And frankly, I think he's got an excellent chance at getting it at some point or another. I don't think he'll get a special election, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if the current election is voided, and there is a new election come this November. If there is one, take him off the lineup; there is no way he will lose.

The second is a little more difficult. That being that most of what Dino ran on won't work in a Senate race, and most of the issues that he avoided, namely abortion, and other issues that could hurt him, such as the war on terror, (although it might not if things continue to go well), also are going to be big issues.

This is bigger then it sounds. Dino ran as well as he did by first running against Olympia, and second running on personality. He can't run against Olympia running for Senate, and he certainly can't run against DC with the Republicans so firmly in charge. And while he'd still best Cantwell in the personality department, it wouldn't be by nearly as much. Gregoire isn't a good-looking woman, and she is a horribly grating and unlikable public speaker. Cantwell is both good looking, and much more affable to a crowd.

That said, Dino has a real gloss on him in the public's eye right now. General goodwill, and a feeling that he got cheated will definitely help him should he run. He's proven to be an amazing campaigner, and he'd run his campaign virtually mistake free, almost undoubtedly.

I do think that Dino is the strongest possible challenger. That said, I hope he isn't the challenger. I hope he instead becomes Governor. But time will tell on that one. In the meantime, he'll be an option.

Frm. Congressman Rick White

Rick White isn't someone I would have thought of, but he's clearly making moves toward this race, for good or for bad. There are rumors all over the place, and I got a Christmas card from him, and I think I volunteered for his Congressional Campaign once. Clearly, he's putting his name out there for a reason.

White, now CEO of TechNet, a technology lobbying group, rode the 94 tidal wave to victory over none other then Maria Cantwell. That is his biggest selling point. He is the only person who has actually beaten Maria Cantwell before.

Also, his expert knowledge of tech related issues would also nullify Cantwell's advantage with east-king county Techies. It seems that tech-workers often vote for each other, witness Democrat State Rep. Ross Hunter's two victories in a once-thought impenetrable Republican district in east-King county, and White nullifies her advantage in that area.

Now the downsides, and frankly, this is one of those: “Where do I start?” sort of things:

White lost his Congressional seat after two terms, and both his wins were narrow. Granted, it was to a strong challenger, during a bad year for Republicans, with a Constitution Party candidate involved, but he still lost. His narrow wins were over Cantwell, and against Jeff Coopersmith, who was an incredibly weak candidate in the personality factor, he ran a vicious campaign, but didn’t have enough of a good personality himself to make it work.

Part of the reason he lost, was that he ran as a family man, and then went through a messy divorce. He is now married to a woman who I believe is an ex-staffer in his congressional office, and they have two kids. I believe she is rumored to be part of the reason his first marriage broke up. I don’t know if this would come up in the campaign, but it wouldn’t help him with social conservatives.

Also, he has an image problem as a flip-flopper. One of the reasons he lost was that the Constitution Party candidate was angry for his alleged flip-flopping on abortion and gun control, and a few other issues. The more I’ve looked into it, it seems his positions were distorted greatly by his opponents, and even if he’s not 100% pro-life or pro-gun control, he’s hardly a raving liberal on either category, but I’m still not sure I know exactly what his positions are, and if I, as someone engaged in politics and more knowledgeable about such things bought into the argument, he’s got an image problem, if not a substance problem.

Finally, he’s been out of the limelight for 6 years, 8 by the time of the election. His former experience would be good for his resume, and might help a little in his old congressional district, but it wouldn’t help much statewide with name ID or anything else.

General Republican Bigshot Diane Tebelius

Although she has never been elected to anything, Diane has a resume as long as my arm.

From the Washington State Republican Party website:

* National Committeewoman, Washington State Republican Party, elected - July 31, 2000
* Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, Seattle, Washington, 1986-
* Senator Slade Gorton's Advisory Committee, 1994 -
* Precinct Committeewoman, Meadows Project, 1994 -
* Vice-Chair, 48th District Republicans, King County, 1994 -
* Washington State Republican Party Executive Board, 1998 -
* President, Board of Directors, West Lake Sammamish Association, 1998 -
* Member, Bellevue Rotary, 1998 -
* Adjunct Faculty, Golden Gate University, Seattle Campus, 1989 -
* Washington State Steering Committee, Bush/Cheney Presidential Campaign, 2000
* 48th District Chair, Slade Gorton for Senate, 2000
* Overlake Republican Women's Club

She’s extremely well connected, and well liked by the party. She’s also well liked by editorial boards, as her numerous endorsements for her unsuccessful run in the 8th Congressional district primary, and has stayed in the public’s eye since the election by being part of the revote team for Rossi.

While some might see her loss in the primary for congress as a negative, I don’t think so. She lost do Dave Reichert, Hero Cop and all around Captain America sort of guy (who would be my #1 choice to take on Cantwell, if he hadn’t just been elected to the House), that wasn’t ever going to be beaten. If anything, it just got her name out there more.

She’s a woman, which is clearly helpful in this state, and when I say well connected, I mean it. Other then Dino, I seriously doubt anybody else could raise money better then her. She’s not great on the stump, but she’s comfortable on it. She doesn’t have Dino’s magnetic personality, but she does have the sort of technical knowledge and background that makes her non-threatening, and she’s got more personality then Gorton, McKenna, Reed, or most other recent statewide Republican winners.

How the public perceives her is largely up in the air. I think her image is probably mostly positive for those who know her, which basically includes only politically aware folks in the 8th Congressional, but she’s got a blank slate to paint on, which is both a positive and a negative. Positive in that she can craft her image without much baggage, bad in that so can her opponents.

She would be a formidable candidate; of that there can be no doubt. If it would be enough to get her over the hump of being a statewide elected Republican in Washington is anybody’s guess. But she’s certainly worth a look, and she’s certainly someone to be seriously considered.

These are the most likely candidates, as I know them. A few others that deserve a mention:

State Sen. Luke Esser – Esser finished a close 3rd in the 8th Congressional primary. He’s a good-natured guy, and a good public servant, but I fear he ran too much to the right during his Congressional primary to have a good chance statewide. I think he’s more likely to run for the 8th sometime in the future, or perhaps Governor, where he could downplay his social conservativism like Rossi did. He’s only 42, and his State Senate seat is up in 06, so he’d have to give that up. I think he’ll probably wait for a better chance.

Congressmen Dave Reichert and Congresswoman Cathy McMorris - I mention them both at the same time because they both have the same problem: Both are newly elected Representatives, unlikely to leave their seats, and probably wisely so. If Reichert hadn’t just been elected to Congress, he would be an excellent candidate. If he either was just still sheriff, or a two-or-three term Congressman, I think he would be a great candidate. But as it is, he’d not only be endangering the 8th Congressional seat, but he’d take a lot of flack for leaving it so fast from the editorial boards as well as some Republicans. Same for McMorris. As State House Minority leader, or with a few more Congressional terms under her belt, she’d be a good candidate, but as a newly elected house member? Highly unlikely, and probably not wise.

Congressman Richard ‘Doc’ Hastings – Hastings, on paper, looks like a decent candidate: A generally well regarded, experienced Representative. But he’s from the most conservative part of the state, has little to no name recognition outside his district, and just isn’t a big-time sort of personality. I don’t see him running, and I doubt he’d be all that strong of a statewide candidate.

Secretary Of State Sam Reed – Reed may have been a decent candidate a few months ago, had he wanted the job, which is unlikely, but now, I doubt it. He has been twice elected statewide to Secretary of State, and had a good image around the state. However, now, things have changed. He angered conservatives by calling the last election ‘well run’, and wasn’t perceived as being helpful enough to Rossi during the vote-counting process, worse, being antagonistic to his positions. Some people tried, unsuccessfully, to recall him for certifying the election results, which they regarded as illegitimate. Also, the base, and the party, wasn’t happy with his support of I-872, or the ‘Louisiana Primary’ Initiative I don’t think he’d survive the primary anymore, and I’m also relatively sure he’d get one no matter what anybody did.

Attorney General Rob McKenna – Same problem as Reichert and McMorris. He’s actually already taken his name out of consideration, just so you all know. Could he change his mind? I doubt it. But look for him to run for Governor or Senator sometime in the next 6-12 years. I think he’ll have no problem staying in his AG job.

I’m sure there are some I’m not aware of, or that I am forgetting. But as of now, these are the people that I could see making a run. Time will tell.

Cantwell Afraid...

2005-03-11T21:34:00.000-08:00

Sorry this hasn't been as active, I've had a lot of complications in life, and there hasn't been much to report, but here is some very interesting news:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5CPolitics%5Carchive%5C200503%5CPOL20050310b.html

Democrats See Cantwell as Republicans' Number-One Target
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Morning Editor
March 10, 2005

(CNSNews.com) - President Bush and Karl Rove are "working on a plan to attack Democrats in the U.S. Senate," and their number one target is Maria Cantwell of Washington, according to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

In an email message to Democrats, DSCC Chairman Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) warned that Republicans, buoyed by electoral gains in 2004, want to increase their majorities in Congress in 2006.

"With increased majorities, they know they can appoint right-wing judges at will, pass legislation to restrict a woman's right to choose, and rollback our precious environmental protections," Schumer wrote.

Republicans have already drawn up a list of "targets" -- politicians to be defeated -- and Cantwell, the U.S. Senator from Washington, tops the list, he said.

He described the effort to oust Cantwell as "revenge" for her very close election in 2000, when Cantwell defeated incumbent Republican Sen. Slade Gorton by about 2,000 votes out of more than 2 million cast.

Now, Schumer said, Republicans are planning to flood the airways with negative attack ads -- and send campaign specialists to Washington State from around the country.

"Some think this could be one of the nastiest elections that Washington State has seen in a long while," Schumer said.

Describing Cantwell as a "fighter that just won't quit," Schumer noted that she served with him on the Senate Judiciary Committee -- "and fought Bush and Ashcroft's efforts to pack the courts with right-wing judges."

Moreover, Schumer said, Cantwell "opposed Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, is a staunch defender of a woman's right to choose, led the effort to protect consumers from identity theft, and stood up to Enron and the big polluters.

"Maria Cantwell has stood up when it counts -- and we need to stand with her," he concluded, urging Democrats to send money now - to "make sure that Maria's independent voice continues to be heard in the U.S. Senate."

So far, no Republican has announced his or her intention to run against Cantwell next year, but a recent poll indicates that Dino Rossi, the man who narrowly lost Washington's gubernatorial race in November, might have a chance of defeating her.

According to the Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters conducted Feb. 22, 2005, Rossi attracts 47 percent of the vote to Cantwell's 44 percent -- a margin that falls within the poll's 4.5-point margin of error.

------------------------------

So, the dems are already squaking about how 'nasty' we are gonna be to Cantwell, and Rossi is already beating her in the polls.

Granted, Rossi isn't necessarily going to run, and undoubtedly won't if he gets a re-vote (he'll win easily), but it's good news.

2005-02-15T11:24:00.000-08:00

Part Four: What's happened since

Since 1994, it has been a slow shift away from our peak. In 1996, we might have had a real shot at Governor. Lowry's term as Governor was disastrous, filled with many unpopular policies as well as a sexual harassment scandal. However, he had the good common sense to not run for re-election, and the Democrats instead nominated likable King County Executive Gary Lock for Governor, and the Republicans accidentally nominated right-wing extremist Ellen Craswell for Governor. While Craswell was a nice person in private, she was horrible on the stump and in debates, she looked something like a clueless Grandmother who had wandered into a corperate board trying to give the men cookies, so they literally had every advantage in that race, and Locke won easily.

The Congressional races in 1996 were also mixed. Randy Tate lost a close race against a similarly young politician, State Senator Adam Smith, and it took days to know if Linda Smith was reelected, although she ultimately was, but we held on to the rest of our seats, including Metcalf's, who was targeted heavily by union money, and ended the year 6-3.

1998 wasn't a good year either. We lost control of one of the State Senate, and were now tied in the State House. In Congress, Rick White was defeated by former Congressman Jay Inslee, who had moved to his district to run. Linda Smith ran for Senate, and was crushed by Patty Murray in a 56-42 blowout, and her 96 challenger, Brian Baird, coasted into her old Congressional seat.

In 2000, things got worse. Republican Activist and Talk Show host John Carlson was blown out of the water in the Governor's race. Locke hadn't managed to offend anybody really, and Carlson had a poor image among swing voters, and didn't run a strong campaign.

Also, unlike Nethercutt, Metcalf honored his term-limits pledge and stepped down after 3 terms, which set off a hot race to replace him between State Representative John Koster and Snohomish County Councilman Dave Larsen. It looked for a long time as if Koster would keep the seat, but a few missteps, some funding mistakes on the part of the national party and some good strategy by Larsen, combined with a little luck (i.e. a good year for Democrats, partly due to the early Florida call), Larsen was able to win an upset 50-46 over Koster. All other seats stayed the same; Nethercutt didn't have many problems, even with his broken term-limits pledge. It was now 3-6 Republican. We also kept the open Secretary of State's office, and Doug Sutherland defeated frm. Gov. Mike Lowry for the statewide elected position of Lands Commissioner.

Most people remember 2000 for the whole Florida Presidential election fiasco. But we also had our own little Florida here in the Senate race. Maria Cantwell, who had lost her Congressional seat in 1994, had since become a multi-millionaire in the tech industry, and was persuaded to run, and spend a great deal of her own money, running for Senate. In the primary, she defeated Insurance Commissioner Deborah Senn, who is popular with the far-left of the party, mostly because she was seen as someone who could beat Slade.

Ironically, she ran on the same 'It's time for a change' theme as Slade had in 1980. The race was close, very close, and Cantwell was predicted the winner early in the night, but when all the numbers were in on election night, Slade was ahead. With the absentee ballots still coming in, he stayed ahead with every county till King reported. When King County reported it's final numbers, he had lost by a little less then 2000 votes. A recount actually added a little bit to Cantwell's numbers.

Back then, there were some people complaining about some of the things that have since come more to light with Dino Rossi's 'loss' for Governor, such as stuffing ballot boxes with illegal provisional votes, but anyhow, for the purposes of the Senate race back then, that was that.

However, there was one complication: Cantwell had loaned her campaign somewhere to the neighborhood of 10 million dollars. Anybody remember the end of the tech boom? It really went downhill fast in the next 3-6 months after the election, and Cantwell's personal worth tanked. To this day, her campaign is in debt 2.5 million dollars due to the fact she couldn't pay off her loans. (the finances about how you 'loan' your campaign money, yet really someone else is loaning it, is complicated, and I'll let someone with a whole lot more knowledge about such things)

In 2001, two State Representatives, one Republican and one Democrat, both resigned. State Law requires that the County Council appoint someone from the same party till a special election is held in November.

In the 21st legislative district, Republican Renee Radcliff was replaced by Joe Marine, and A Democrat whose name I can't remember was replaced by Jean Berkey.

Strangely enough, tons of party time and money went into keeping Radcliff’s seat, but little went into trying to grab Berkey's. This seems to make sense on paper. The 21st had been a swing district, and had 2 Republicans after 1994, and the 38th had a State Senator who was a Republican from 1994 to 1998, but had otherwise been solidly Democrat since the late 60's. But when the results were in, Joe Marine was blown out of the water by more then 20 points by Mukilteo Mayor Brian Sullivan, and Berkey won her race by only 500 votes against Erv Hoglund, a former military and airline pilot who's wife was Snohomish County Republican Party Chairwoman. The result was the loss of the state house, which had been tied. In retrospect, it seems that Hoglund was a good enough candidate, and Berkey weak enough, that Hoglund should have received more backing from the party.

Very briefly, 2002 didn't mean much. We did gain control of the State Senate while losing seats in the State House, but we didn't gain or lose any Congressional seats, and there were no other elections.

I'm not going to go in-depth with what happened here in 2004, as it's obviously fresh in any interested parties minds. We held the two open Congressional seats, including the 8th although Bush lost it, kept both Statewide offices we held previously, won the State AG's office, while losing a two seats in the State Senate, and a few in the State House, with the Democrats controlling both. George Nethercutt, who had been known as a Giant Killer since offing Tom Foley, lost a not-so-close race against Patty Murray. For whatever reason, Washington seems to love Murray.

Of course, Gregoire lost, lost, and won, the race for Governor against State Senator Dino Rossi in an election that made Florida 2000 look neat and orderly. And as I'm sure you all know, the fight for that one rages on.

Next up, I will discuss where this leaves us, discuss some of the possible candidates, as well as start updating every time I see relevant news to the race.

2005-02-15T11:22:00.000-08:00

Part Three: The 1994 Republican revolution and Washington State

Luckily for us, those circumstances came.

1994 was the year of the Republican Revolution, and nowhere was its effects greater then in Washington State. In a reverse of 1992, a bunch of little known, low-stature Republican candidates blew their Democratic challengers out of the water.

Some came easily. Doc Hastings, who had lost a close race to Jay Inslee in the republican leaning 4th Congressional district, blew him out of the water this time. Slade Gorton was reelected easily over King County Councilman Ron Sims. Jennifer Dunn was also easily re-elected.

In other races, it was harder, but it was still done. Jack Metcalf, an in-again-out-again State Senator, who had lost to Warren Magnuson twice before decades earlier for Senate and had lost in 1992 for Congress, won this time in the second Congressional district. In the first Congressional district, Rick White, a lawyer who hadn’t been elected to anything previously, unseated one-term Representative Maria Cantwell. In the Ninth, Randy Tate, a 25 year old who had been elected to the State House at 19, won his race to fill an open seat. In the third Congressional district, Linda Smith, a State Senator and the only person in history to win a Congressional Primary in a write-in campaign, unseated Jolene Unsoeld.

But nothing could have been bigger then what happened in the 5th Congressional district. George Nethercutt, a former assistant to Sen. Ted Stevens, lawyer, and virtual unknown in his district, unseated Tom Foley, the Speaker of the House.

Perhaps some could see it coming. Foley's district had always been conservative, and he had always survived. He had a close race occasionally, but he always managed to hang on. It was a similar situation to Tom Dashle in South Dakota, a liberal from a rural, conservative area wins by being populist and good constituency services. But this time, Foley's Washington DC liberalism and his lawsuit against the state for passing term-limits played against him, and caught him at the exact wrong time. Nethercutt won 51-49.

It was the cherry on top of the Republican revolution. Foley wouldn't have been speaker anyway, but his actual defeat sent shockwaves through the state and the country.

Washington had reelected its Republican Senator, and had flipped from 1-8 Democrats in Congress, to 7-2 Republican. Likewise, we had won both the State House and State Senate. It was the biggest earthquake in Washington State history.

2005-02-15T11:16:00.000-08:00

Part Two: 1988 and Bush Senior's lonely victory, through the 1992 disaster

However, all was not lost. In 1988, Dan Evans decided not to try for a new term in the Senate. I don't believe he was ever really big on it in the first place, but he was, and is, a loyal party man, and knew that he was their only realistic chance at the party keeping the seat, so he ran. But the situation was different now, and he knew it. He also knew something else: His old colleague Gorton wanted back in.

So Gorton ran again in 1988. He defeated Congressman Mike Lowry in a fairly close race. But, at the same time Bush 41 lost Washington by a point or two, even though he won 40 States, and Booth Gardner was easily re-elected.

Lowry was a weak candidate. He was far to the left, and had a reputation as being short-tempered and volatile. So Slade's victory goes to prove the point: You need it all for a Republican to win Washington. In this case, you need a high profile, strong candidate that is at least perceived as moderate; against a weak, lower-profile candidate

Things didn't improve after 88. Nothing really changed in 90, if my information is correct, no incumbent congressman lost and both the State House and the State Senate stayed Democrat. Then, 1992 hit.

1992 was the low point for the Washington State Republicans. In the wake of George Bush senior's disastrous re-election campaign, Washington Republicans lost almost everything.

On the Democratic side, Brock Adams, who had defeated Slade Gorton in 86, decided to retire in light of a sex scandal. A one-term State Senator named Patty Murray, who was considered not the sharpest knife in the drawer, had declared a challenge to Adams even before he announced his retirement. It put her ahead of the pack, and she won the primary.

In the meantime, Mike Lowry, a former Congressman who had lost statewide in 83 and 88 for the Senate, won the Democratic nomination for Governor. Finally, Christine Gregoire, a longtime Assistant Attorney General who hadn't held elected office before, was nominated on the Democratic side for Attorney General.

On the Republican side, we nominated 5-term congressman from the 8th Congressional District, Rod Chandler, a district that includes east King County and surrounding areas, for Senate. State Attorney General Ken Eikenberry, who had replaced Gorton, ran for Governor, and King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng for Attorney General.

On paper, it looked like the Democrats were nominating the bottom of the barrel, and they were, and Republicans were nominating the best they had, which is also true.

Problem is, not only did Murray, Lowry, and Gregoire win, they won convincingly. It wasn't even close. Murray buried Chandler by 200,000 votes, Lowry by about half that much. Gegoire won the biggest of all, against what was probably, on paper anyway, the strongest candidate in Norm Maleng, who still is King County Prosecutor.

Not only that, but we lost every house seat in the state except for the 8th, which was won by former King County Republican Chairwoman Jennifer Dunn. Even the 4th Congressional District, which was usually solid Republican, was won by Jay Inslee. Last but not least, Deborah Senn was elected Insurance Commissioner. Anybody who pays close attention to politics knows just how bad this is. Senn’s ideology was to the extreme left and later was locked out of some dealings with insurance companies by Gov. Gary Locke, also a democrat, because they refused to negotiate with her.

It was hard for the state Republicans to sink much lower then that. They lost nearly everything, and they lost it with good candidates, candidates that far outmatched their Democratic opponents in stature. They won the Secretary of State race, and the race for the 8th Congressional. I don't believe we won any more statewide offices, and we won 1 out of 10 federal offices.

You can attribute it to the magic of Clinton, or to the ineptness of Bush 41 sans-Lee Atwater, or to a poorly run state party, or a hundred other things. But what seems clear is that the bottom of the barrel for Washington State Republicans is much lower then our high is high. It's a depressing reality. We can sink pretty low in this state, but outright victory is very, very difficult. Only certain circumstances will allow it.

2005-02-15T11:12:00.000-08:00

Part One: The Regan Revolution and it's effects on the state

Washington is one of those states where the R's have mini-breakthroughs, and occasionally seem as if it will emerge from a solidly left-leaning state to a true battleground for party dominance, or even a right-leaning state. But it has always seemed to be short-lived. For Republicans to win most statewide races, or swing districts, we need most everything to go right.

The first time in modern history that this state had a major breakthrough was in 1980, when John Spellman was elected Governor, and Slade Gorton was elected Senator, and of course, Reagan won the state on his way to routing Carter.

Spellman was a special case. He had run before, in 1976, after serving as King County Executive, and lost to Democrat Dixie Lee Ray. He would have lost again, most likely, had Dixie Lee Ray been his opponent, but fortunately for him, she wasn't. Ray was similar to many old-time Washington Democrats in that she wasn't a toe-the-line liberal, but neither was she a moderate. Like our Senator at the time, Henry 'Scoop' Jackson, she took strong stands when she believed in them on both sides, which gave her the same sort of populist appeal.

The problem with that was, that the Democrat party in the state was becoming more orthodox liberal as opposed to populist types. Ray antagonized the environmentalist movement, among other things, and was defeated in the primary by then-State Senator Jim McDermott, whom I'm sure you all know, as he is now a Congressman, one of Michael Moore's favorites actually. Perhaps you know him by his nickname 'Baghdad Jim'.

McDermott, however loved by the ultra-left establishment, couldn't win a statewide race, especially with the Reagan tidal wave against him. Spellman cruised into office.

In the meantime, State Attorney General Slade Gorton achieved what was thought nearly impossible: He defeated six-term Senator Warren Magnuson in what was easily one of the biggest upsets of the political season. He ran heavily on the fact that Magnuson had been in office too long, and it was time for a change. It is also worthy of note, that Gorton's replacement in the State AG's office was Republican Ken Eichenberry.

Of course, as all this was happening, Ronald Reagan carried the state fairly easily.

In 1983, the Republican position in Washington looked even better. Senator Jackson died, and Gov. Spellman appointed his replacement, former Governor Dan Evans. The Legislature called a special election, and Evans trampled Congressman Mike Lowry for the right to serve out the rest of Jackson's term. Briefly, the Republicans held the Governor's Mansion, the State Attorney General's Office, and both Senate seats. I'm not certain, but I believe we held the Secretary of State's office as well, and maybe some other statewide offices.

However, this was, as it ends up, a high-watermark for the state. In 1984, even in the wake of Ronald Reagan winning every state but Minnesota, Governor Spellman was beaten by Pierce County Executive Booth Gardner. Booth Gardner was a good candidate, fairly moderate, and well-liked personality wise, while Spellman was never exactly a charisma magnet.

Two years later, it got worse. Slade Gorton faced a very stiff re-election bid from Congressman Brock Adams. After winning 4 statewide races, he lost. This could be attributed to the general poor showing of Democrats during this year, but Slade's strength as a candidate proves just how little has to go wrong for Republicans to lose in this state.

2005-02-15T11:05:00.000-08:00

The Challenge as I see it

As a Republican, on a national level, I was ecstatic about the returns of the elections in 2004 nationally. I was concerned for a long time that in times as dangerous as ours, we might actually have elected an anti-war liberal like Kerry. Luckily for me, and America, we didn't, and Bush won. We also picked up 4 Senate seats; personally, I was especially excited about Mel Martinez in Florida. Not only is he a good spokesman for our party, but he kept Betty Castor, who's instincts on matters very important to our future are so wrong, it is almost painful, from a seat in the Senate. It would have scared me to the core had a swing-state like Florida sent someone who saw it as appropriate to defend someone who called for 'death for Israel, death for the US...Jihad, jihad, jihad', to the Senate to vote on National Security matters. Tom Dashle of course, was also a huge victory. That'll certainly put the fear of God into any Democrat in a red state.

Which brings us to our problem: The red states, and a few very light blue states, have done their part as far as Republicans go recently. It seems as if Washington, a fairly light blue state, should be able to do better.

But much to my disappointment has not. We've managed to keep a certain segment to ourselves, to keep the Democrats from running over us. It's weird to think about, but, but in spite of the fact that the Democrat victories are usually fairly narrow, we haven't been able to put up a high-profile statewide winner since 1994 (not counting, of course, Rossi's 'loss').

But Cantwell is uniquely vulnerable, and Washington is ripe for a political upheaval.

Let me tell you why:

First off, any discussion about contemporary Washington state politics are influenced by two words: 'Dino' and 'Rossi'.

Dino Rossi was able to win, win, and only after significant illegalities and questionable vote counting practices, lose, the Governor's mansion, against a fairly popular State Attorney General. Many people, including myself, thought that Rossi was little more then a sacrificial lamb when his campaign started in 2003. While he may have 'lost', maybe, time will tell, this cannot be ignored.

How did this happen?

First off, Dino Rossi was able to argue, successfully, that Olympia had become a stagnant, buddy-buddy place where the policy isn't set for the people, but for the political elite. That it was grossly incompetent, inefficient, and needed someone to clean house. Basically, it was the same message as Arnold Schwartzenegger, but obviously, without the star power, and with less obvious impending doom. Also, he was able to paint his opponent as a lifelong politician who was out of touch, and too ingrained in the Olympia power structure.

Part of the reason Rossi has been able to keep up his push for a revote so easily, and why Gregoire's governorship has been so clouded, is because all the problems with the election reinforced his campaign message. In 'losing', Rossi proved himself right.

And it has angered people. A lot of people. The majority of the state. State Democrats have a horrible image problem right now. They played their hand since the first count so ham fistedly and so obviously in their interest only, and not in the interest of finding the true winner, that they have damaged the parties reputation statewide. That is in large part why Gregoire has 38% approval ratings, and a majority of the state thinks Dino Rossi legitimately won the election.

As of now, we do not know if Rossi will get the revote. Obviously, that will affect the future in many ways. But what I do know is that anger at the way the last election was handled and the tactics the Democrats used, backfired politically. It seems very likely they won the battle but lost the war. Whatever happens in the Senate race, I expect 2006 to be a huge year for Republicans at the state level.

Will this carry over to the Senate race? Well, that is anybody's guess. But it doesn't seem impossible for several reasons:

First, the base is angry. They feel cheated out of the Governor's race, and with good reason. I think that turnout among Republicans in 2006 will be sky-high because of this, as will volunteer hours, individual donations, and other things that the base can do to make this a possibility. If we can harness that energy, it can be rode to victory.

Second, Cantwell is a one-term Senator who barely won her race in 2000, a win that seems especially questionable in light of all the problems that have shown up since Rossi's 'loss'.

She got one-term in the House in 1992 before being bucked after 2 years of a disastrous, democrat reign in Olympia, full of tax rising and other unpopular proposals. It seems likely, in the direction that Olympia is going, that she will face a similar problem in 2006. Republicans won’t be able to run against national Democrats the way they could in 1994, but the parallels aren’t entirely to be dismissed. She obviously is an incumbent in a difficult position.

Third, is that Cantwell is broke. She is 2.5 million dollars in the hole. While she certainly will be back to positive numbers when she starts focusing on fundraising, it is not only conceivable, but seems likely, that the right Republican can out-fundraise her, especially with the base as energized as it is.

Fourth, Rossi's strong showing might well convince people, not only locally, but also nationally, that she can be beaten. It could mean for a stronger challenger then might otherwise might have run and will almost certainly mean more money for whomever runs.

Anyhow, who am I and what am I doing here? My name is Cliff Smith. I am a 20-something Republican from Washington State. I have worked, and will likely work again, in politics, and I am already looking forward to the 2006 election in my state, especially, the race to unseat Maria Cantwell. After witnessing the success of Thune v. Dashle, and the creation of other such blogs, such as Dayton v. Kennedy, I have decided that the Washington State Senate Race needs it's own blogger, and I have decided to give it a go.

It is to understand, strategize, report, and discuss these possibilities, that I have started this blog. I encourage anybody to send me any information they can at zbigreddogz@hotmail.com

The first thing I will do to give us somewhere to start, is a brief history of Washington State Politics as I know it. Hopefully from there, we can proceed as others have, and trade info, get information out, and help each other in the effort to unseat Cantwell.

For now, I bid you, farewell.