34th District Endorses: West Seattle Dems Like West Seattle Dems
If there's been a pattern from the District Democrat endorsement meetings, it's that the current Mayor and the current City Attorney haven't been getting much love. Before last night, neither had picked up an endorsement, with Nickels even losing a co-endorsement vote with Joe Mallahan at the 46th District Dems--they decided they'd rather endorse no one at all.
But that changed last night in West Seattle, where the 34th District Dems proved to be a lot more satisfied with the current state of city government--or at least with the members thereof who hail from their hood. In "Don't call it a comeback" fashion, West Seattleite Carr wrapped up the group's sole endorsement and Nickels, while unable to score it all for himself (even on his home turf), got the most votes of any mayoral candidate and managed a dual endorsement with Michael McGinn.
Continuing their tribal run, the group nearly endorsed challenger David Ginsberg over Council Prez Richard Conlin. Which seems strange at first sight, given their establishment-friendliness with Carr and Nickels, until you remember that Ginsberg hails from West Seattle. Notably, this race contained a ballot controversy (as detailed in the above link to West Seattle Blog). In the first vote, Ginsberg came up just shy of a sole endorsement, which led his supporters to argue that two spoiled ballots shouldn't have counted towards the total. (Without them, Ginsberg would've had it.) But Robert's Rules of Order won out, and in a revote, Ginsberg was a few votes short, and ended up co-endorsed with Conlin. So much for home-field advantage.
On the rest of the Council races, the group was similarly indecisive, issuing dual endorsements down the board. On measures, initiatives, and the like, the bag fee got a "no position" while Tim Eyman's odious I-1033 of course got shot down.
One other note: The Seattle Times reports that Harvard man Peter Steinbrueck, was in the house--and threw his weight behind Tom Carr-challenger Pete Holmes. But one has to wonder if he looked at the mayoral field and thought, "I could be beating all these chumps right now."
3 comment(s)
34th Dem says:
You got a shylock with the West Seattle family because you haven't paid your juice? Nickels is the head of the Family who runs the show. He decides who gets made and who gets whacked. The boss also gets points from all Family business, it's that simple.
It's not like he tells you he's going to whack you, or that you will to have a debt counseling session with some guys. You don't know what he's talking about? Well, then you shouldn't have been messing there in the first place.
Posted On: Thursday, Jul. 9 2009 @ 9:41AM
Seely says:
I personally find it telling that Nickels only got a co-endorsement, and not the whole enchilada, in his backyard. Then again, I'm skeptical of how important these district endorsements at the end of the day.
Posted On: Thursday, Jul. 9 2009 @ 10:22AM
Diogenese says:
The telling point was that the 34th endorsed every incumbant in Seattle races. Had it not been for a diligent reader of Democratic questionnaires, Port incumbant John Creighton would have been endorsed despite his 'religion belongs on public property' views.
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."
Posted On: Thursday, Jul. 23 2009 @ 4:54PM