The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
[Gubernatorial races] sound like an excellent topic
Turns out besides voting for a new king every 4 years we also have to elect other people. Among them Governors. And its that time of year(s).
Here in Washington we have the fairly popular Governor Christine Gregoire who has decided she isn't running for a third term. She has been pretty good.
Our new contenders:
Jay Inslee (D)
State politician, and to my understanding popular if a little nutty.
Rob McKenna (R)
Bill Gate's emaciated twin, Rob McKenna has been a wildly popular AG, where he has done a pretty decent job. Apparently he's also a wild raving right wing lunatic. IDK.
Dino Rossi (R)
He's got the loser stink. So even if he runs he's not going anywhere. Plus I think he could lose to Gregoire even when she isn't running.
Those of you in the lesser states have Governors I hear as well.
She didn't do everything I wanted, but she did a lot of really good things.
Rob McKenna was one of the AGs who tried to repeal the HealthCare Reform, and I hope people realise that. He's got name recognition and a lot of across-the-board appeal, so unless someone can come out and really put up a fight on the D side I think he's going to win.
Michigan's trying to recall Rick Snyder already. Whoops!
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
Apparently here in NC the frontrunner for the GOP guber primary is quite a bit ahead of the Incumbent.
Perdue is polling pretty low right now, and I really think it's almost all economy related.
Both senators (neither of which are up for re-election in 2012) are doing pretty bad, but are more favored than unfavored, and Obama is currently the front runner going into the presidential.
But for some reason, Perdue is trailing by 7 points in a PPP poll, which seems odd, by comparison.
She'll probably end up losing, which is going to realllllly suck.
It is a project of the WA State Democrats explaining how right wing McKenna really is. His moderate reputation is built on lies and a sympathetic media.
Rob’s Friends and Allies
Rob’s been working hard during his career to build the kind of network that you need to run for Governor. Take a look at some of the people he counts as his allies in his endless pursuit of higher office.
Tim Eyman
Rob’s built a relationship with professional ballot initiative sponsor Tim Eyman even before he became Attorney General. He was known for allying with Eyman to fight for property tax limitations on the King County Council, and earned praise from a “giddy” Eyman for his effort to undermine the motor tabs levy that helped pay for light rail. McKenna even helped Eyman write the controversial Initiative 747, which was struck down by a state judge, and worked with Eyman to slash the size of the King County Council. More often than not throughout his career, Rob has shared Tim Eyman’s priorities and helped get them on the ballot.
Susan Hutchison
When conservative Republican Susan Hutchison ran for King County Executive in 2009, Rob McKenna was right by her side the entire way. Whether he was making excuses for Hutchison’s refusal to declare her position on a woman’s right to choose or covering for her attempt to keep King County residents in the dark about her past, Hutchison had no better ally than McKenna. Now that national Republicans are encouraging Hutchison to challenge Patty Murray for Senate, it bears watching whether McKenna will re-pledge his support for her in an effort to cement a statewide ally.
Kemper Freeman
Rob has a storied history of working with Eastside developer and Bellevue Squate owner and Republican donor Kemper Freeman. McKenna paired up with Kemper Freeman in their effort to defeat the mid-1990s referendums to establish the region’s light rail system; Freeman’s thousands of dollars in developer money paid for the expert advice that McKenna cited in letters and publications denouncing light rail and calling for more highway spending. McKenna even made sure a Kemper-funded study attacking light rail got an audience before the King County Council. Since their anti-light rail heyday, Freeman and his companies have directed nearly $7,000 to McKenna’s campaigns.
George W. Bush
It could be that Rob had no greater idol than George W. Bush. In 2001, Rob was considered in a search for a new U.S. Attorney for Washington state that required applicants to “fully embrace the philosophy of George W. Bush.” McKenna quickly showed off how close he was to Bush when he helped water down an 2004 ordinance dealing with the PATRIOT Act because it used “inflammatory” language against Bush, and in 2005 when he declared he shared President Bush’s “top priority” of tort reform. When Rob met former First Lady Laura Bush in 2006, he even told her that he wishes his wife Marilyn could be just like her.
Dino Rossi
Rob has done quite a bit throughout his career to help Dino Rossi, his likely predecessor as Republican gubernatorial nominee. Rob gave the proverbial thumbs up to Rossi’s effort to defeat Governor Christine in the 2004 recount – despite being charged to defend the state’s election process against Rossi’s allies. In 2008, McKenna and Rossi were caught coordinating with the Washington Association of Realtors to produce nearly half a million dollars in ads for their campaigns. That same year, McKenna helped slow walk an investigation into Rossi ads paid for by another conservative lobby group. Now that Rob’s being called Rossi’s “heir apparent,” he’s using his office to go after the same groups that brought him – and Rossi – to where they are today.
Washington Mutual
For years, Rob loved to cite Washington Mutual as an example of “responsible corporate leadership,” even inviting the company to conferences that he sponsored on “ethical behavior.” All the while, Rob missed the fact that Washington Mutual was building the nation’s largest predatory lending business with the highest mortgage failure rate in America (it’s possible he was too busy counting the thousands in campaign contributions he’d taken from WaMu executives). Months after WaMu failed in 2008, McKenna claimed no one had predicted the Financial Crisis – forgetting that WaMu’s own CEO had warned of “above average risk” in the housing market as early as 2004.
Wealthy Land Owners
One of Rob’s last acts on the King County Council was to vote against King County’s 2004 rural land use ordinances, which he called the most “draconian” in the United States. Almost as soon as he became Attorney General, McKenna filed a “decisive” brief in support of the Citizens’ Alliance for Property Rights, an alliance of powerful developers and land owners who had contributed tens of thousands of dollars to his campaigns. He even tried to have the regulations overturned by popular ballot. In 2009, McKenna and the land owners convinced the Washington Supreme Court to strike down King County’s land use ordinances.
Right-Wing Supreme Court Justices John Roberts & Sam Alito
When George W. Bush appointed then-federal judges John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court, Rob was quick to praise them as “outstanding picks.” Since then, Roberts and Alito have been reliable ultra-right wing votes on the High Court. Roberts and Alito joined with the majority in the 2010 Citizens United decision to allow corporations to dump unregulated millions into political advertising. When President Obama called out the justices for their decision at the State of the Union Address, Alito called the President a liar – and Roberts attacked the President’s words as “very troubling” instead of criticizing Alito’s outburst.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Rob wouldn’t be where he is today without his friends at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The national Chamber dumped $1.5 million of ads against McKenna’s 2004 opponent, Deborah Senn, under the name of the “Voter Education Committee” front group as part of a $100 million campaign to “knock out” pro-consumer Attorney General candidates across America. The ads spurred a wave of backlash by local business groups, the Seattle Times and even the Seattle-area Chamber of Commerce. McKenna repaid his friends at the national Chamber by refusing to even consider penalties against it after a King County judge ruled the Chamber broke Washington election laws.
The National Rifle Association
Rob, who took almost $5,000 from pro-gun groups such as the National Rifle Association, helped strike a blow against handgun control when he issued an opinion in 2008 stating that then-Mayor Greg Nickels’ Seattle handgun ban was in violation of state law. McKenna’s opinion was a key component of dual lawsuits filed against Seattle by the NRA and gun owners seeking to overturn the ban, including one who took his Glock pistol into a community center to protest the law. In February 2010, a King County Superior Court judge struck down Seattle’s effort to restrict gun violence in its streets.
Building Industry Association of Washington
Rob may be in a fight with the BIAW today, but McKenna and the anti-environmental lobbying group have a long history of successful collaboration. In 2004, the BIAW – best known for comparing environmentalists to Nazis and attempting to destroy efforts to save Puget Sound – spent $275,000 on ads attacking McKenna’s opponent Deborah Senn. McKenna lavished praise on the group for refusing to “wilt” under pressure from “the left,” and even praised the BIAW’s effort to oust Governor Christine Gregoire – while he was charged with defending Washington against the group’s challenge. When the BIAW was accused of giving illegal contributions to Dino Rossi’s campaign in 2008, McKenna slow-walked the state investigation into the donations until after the general election.
Washington Policy Center
Few of Washington’s right wing organizations are closer to Rob than the right-wing Washington Policy Center (WPC). In 2008, McKenna praised the group at its Annual Dinner as his “partner” in policymaking. It’s been a fruitful partnership for Rob, since he took over $25,000 from members of the WPC’s Board of Directors in his campaigns for attorney general. In 2009 alone, the WPC organized a massive project to kill the President’s health care reform bill, sponsored a statewide screening of a film that denied the existence of climate change. Just like Rob, the WPC attacked light rail, calling the transit system “socialistic”, and backed Susan Hutchison in the 2009 King County Executive race.
Health Care Reform Repeal Movement
As health care reform moved closer and closer to reality, McKenna moved to join other Republican attorneys general planning to file lawsuits to kill it. First, he questioned the constitutionality of an agreement that allowed health care reform to pass the U.S. Senate; then he questioned the constitutionality of a requirement for all Americans to have health insurance. Now that health care reform is the law of the land, McKenna is actively plotting with at least 11 other Republicans led by Virginia’s “birther” Attorney General Ken Cucinelli to sue the federal government to destroy health care reform.
Anti-Union Businesses
When it comes to opposing unions generally and workers’ rights specifically, Rob’s always been there for his big business allies. As a King County Councilman, McKenna was always willing to slash the salaries of union workers to help close the County’s budget deficit, and did everything he could to give non-union businesses the advantage in winning county contracts. As attorney general, Rob hailed a state Supreme Court ruling that preserved unequal pay for teachers throughout the state and even personally argued before the state Supreme Court to limit the ability of teachers’ unions to engage in political activity. In February 2010, McKenna even personally delivered the state business lobby’s “Better Workplace Award” to a law firm that specialized in preventing union elections in the workplace.
Wall Street Banks
In the years before the 2008 Financial Crisis, many attorneys general were slamming Wall Street banks for their dangerous lending – but not Rob. While Rob took a cool $40,000 for his attorney general campaigns from commercial banks, he attacked colleagues like former New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for using the power of his office to rein in big banks. He called that approach “wrong” and denounced it as uncontrolled “strong-arming” of the banks. That might explain why he never noticed any wrongdoing while serving on the National Association of Attorneys General Financial Services Committee.
The Insurance Industry
Insurance companies have been some of Rob’s closest friends since he decided to run for statewide office; he’s taken nearly $85,000 from them since he first ran for attorney general. Rob’s repaid the industry by being a “zealot” for tort reform, which would cap the amount of damages that doctors and other businesses could be sued for, and by sitting on his hands while insurance rates in Washington doubled since 1999.
The Oil and Gas Industry
While Americans were paying higher and higher prices at the pump during the mid-2000s, Rob was raking nearly $25,000 in campaign contributions from oil companies like Chevron who were reporting record profits. While campaigning for office, McKenna said he was “troubled” by attempts to describe high gas prices as anything other than “legitimate business.” When prices spiked, Rob assured Washingtonians that he’d fight gas gouging – but professed not to have found any, and even not declared that gas retailers were “free to charge whatever price they chose” for their product.
Here in Kentucky the race is pretty much already decided. The incumbent, Steve Beshear (D), spent most of the Republican primary pointing out that more prominent state Republicans had endorsed his campaign than any of their primary candidates. Every respectable poll has him winning by at least 10%.
Meanwhile, his opponent, David Williams, has gone full speed ahead on the crazy train and is calling for repeal of the 17th amendment.
Taking all your information on a candidate from a website constructed by the opposition is kinda lame.
I think the opposition's voice ought to be heard. The Seattle Times has been telling people for years how moderate McKenna is, I think it's worth considering an argument that he is in fact quite right wing. That website uses facts and documented statements. If they say something that's not true, I'd like to hear what it is.
Whether or not he's right wing is one thing, but if you want to talk about how right wing he is, do that, don't instead say things like, "It could be..." because that's just sensationalism, and the people who will eat that up are probably already voting your way, and the people that aren't going to vote your way are going to roll their eyes, instead of paying attention.
It is a project of the WA State Democrats explaining how right wing McKenna really is. His moderate reputation is built on lies and a sympathetic media.
Rob’s Friends and Allies
Rob’s been working hard during his career to build the kind of network that you need to run for Governor. Take a look at some of the people he counts as his allies in his endless pursuit of higher office.
Tim Eyman
Rob’s built a relationship with professional ballot initiative sponsor Tim Eyman even before he became Attorney General. He was known for allying with Eyman to fight for property tax limitations on the King County Council, and earned praise from a “giddy” Eyman for his effort to undermine the motor tabs levy that helped pay for light rail. McKenna even helped Eyman write the controversial Initiative 747, which was struck down by a state judge, and worked with Eyman to slash the size of the King County Council. More often than not throughout his career, Rob has shared Tim Eyman’s priorities and helped get them on the ballot.
Of all the things on that list this is the one that, properly publicized, will hurt his campaign the most.
Given how the recent batch of Republican governors behaved after the last elections, I don't think I could really trust voting for an R governor at all until they give good evidence that they've cut back heavily on the crazy pills as a party. Add in McKenna's actions on trying to get the healthcare reform ruled as unconstitutional and I don't think I'd vote for him for AG again, much less governor.
Edit: and where is the talk about Kucinich vying for Inslee's house seat if he runs for governor coming from? I've seen it in 2 places now and that seems completely out of left field.
McKenna wins it in a damn landslide here in WA unless something really weird happens. He's reasonably popular in the big population center even among liberals and hasn't been a raving nutter - the first really partisan thing I can recall him doing was getting on the ACA challenge, and I knew as soon as he did it he was looking to bolster his cred and get through to the general.
Honestly he's been a good AG and I'd be cool with it, although I probably wouldn't vote for him, if it weren't for the fact that recently elected GOP governors seem to be channeling their favorite bannana republic dictators. But unless he get's taken out in the primaries (and how is that going to happen, Rossi actually wins a race for the first time in a decade?) I think he's got it locked up. I guess King County could give him the finger over the ACA thing, but I doubt it.
[Edit]
And those 'Man, look what a conservative nutjob McKenna is!' points really come off as reaching. Of course he's gladhanding with the state and national Republican donors and big names. He's a Republicn elected official. That's not exactly damning. I do think his actual policy positions are an unknown to many people, but the election will take care of that, and I don't think he's so far right that he won't take the election in the end.
McKenna wins it in a damn landslide here in WA unless something really weird happens. He's reasonably popular in the big population center even among liberals and hasn't been a raving nutter - the first really partisan thing I can recall him doing was getting on the ACA challenge, and I knew as soon as he did it he was looking to bolster his cred and get through to the general.
Honestly he's been a good AG and I'd be cool with it, although I probably wouldn't vote for him, if it weren't for the fact that recently elected GOP governors seem to be channeling their favorite bannana republic dictators. But unless he get's taken out in the primaries (and how is that going to happen, Rossi actually wins a race for the first time in a decade?) I think he's got it locked up. I guess King County could give him the finger over the ACA thing, but I doubt it.
This is why I posted a link to the Dem's hit site - people ought to know that he's been a really partisan Republican for years before the ACA lawsuit, he's just done a good job of hiding it. And I think that once we Dems get our messaging going, the needle will shift. Inslee has low state-wide name recognition and already does decent on polling, and the name recognition will get fixed in a big way. WA state Dems know the communications game much better than the national guys - we've been playing the "Republican scary boogeyman" card to rile up the base for several cycles in a row now and we've gotten good at it. It will definitely be the toughest race in WA this year, though. Cantwell and Obama will both walk across the finish line here, but the gubernatorial will be a knife fight.
McKenna wins it in a damn landslide here in WA unless something really weird happens. He's reasonably popular in the big population center even among liberals and hasn't been a raving nutter - the first really partisan thing I can recall him doing was getting on the ACA challenge, and I knew as soon as he did it he was looking to bolster his cred and get through to the general.
Honestly he's been a good AG and I'd be cool with it, although I probably wouldn't vote for him, if it weren't for the fact that recently elected GOP governors seem to be channeling their favorite bannana republic dictators. But unless he get's taken out in the primaries (and how is that going to happen, Rossi actually wins a race for the first time in a decade?) I think he's got it locked up. I guess King County could give him the finger over the ACA thing, but I doubt it.
This is why I posted a link to the Dem's hit site - people ought to know that he's been a really partisan Republican for years before the ACA lawsuit, he's just done a good job of hiding it. And I think that once we Dems get our messaging going, the needle will shift. Inslee has low state-wide name recognition and already does decent on polling, and the name recognition will get fixed in a big way. WA state Dems know the communications game much better than the national guys - we've been playing the "Republican scary boogeyman" card to rile up the base for several cycles in a row now and we've gotten good at it. It will definitely be the toughest race in WA this year, though. Cantwell and Obama will both walk across the finish line here, but the gubernatorial will be a knife fight.
He's been a partisan Republican in the sense that he's, you know, a fucking Republican and needs to win elections. Of course he gets contributions from goups like the Chamber of Commerce. I mean, what do you expect? That you go to look up a major Republican's fundraising sheet and see the Sierra Club and Greenpeace? He's a moderate Republican, but he's still a Republican. That entire piece is a laundry list of "He's totally connected to these folks!" which is...useless, really unless 'these folks' are unusually and blatantly toxic. Of that list, only Tim Eyman comes close and frankly I doubt he has the clout to turn an election regardless.
What he says regarding his policy positions will matter far more than the ties on that site since I really don't think most people are very familiar with that despite his name recognition, and he's not going to be coming out swinging with the crazy. Basically, if Dems are counting on turning him into the big bad GOP boogeyman to win this election they better dig up something better than 'gets some $$ from interest groups'.
McKenna wins it in a damn landslide here in WA unless something really weird happens. He's reasonably popular in the big population center even among liberals and hasn't been a raving nutter - the first really partisan thing I can recall him doing was getting on the ACA challenge, and I knew as soon as he did it he was looking to bolster his cred and get through to the general.
Honestly he's been a good AG and I'd be cool with it, although I probably wouldn't vote for him, if it weren't for the fact that recently elected GOP governors seem to be channeling their favorite bannana republic dictators. But unless he get's taken out in the primaries (and how is that going to happen, Rossi actually wins a race for the first time in a decade?) I think he's got it locked up. I guess King County could give him the finger over the ACA thing, but I doubt it.
This is why I posted a link to the Dem's hit site - people ought to know that he's been a really partisan Republican for years before the ACA lawsuit, he's just done a good job of hiding it. And I think that once we Dems get our messaging going, the needle will shift. Inslee has low state-wide name recognition and already does decent on polling, and the name recognition will get fixed in a big way. WA state Dems know the communications game much better than the national guys - we've been playing the "Republican scary boogeyman" card to rile up the base for several cycles in a row now and we've gotten good at it. It will definitely be the toughest race in WA this year, though. Cantwell and Obama will both walk across the finish line here, but the gubernatorial will be a knife fight.
He's been a partisan Republican in the sense that he's, you know, a fucking Republican and needs to win elections. Of course he gets contributions from goups like the Chamber of Commerce. I mean, what do you expect? That you go to look up a major Republican's fundraising sheet and see the Sierra Club and Greenpeace? He's a moderate Republican, but he's still a Republican. That entire piece is a laundry list of "He's totally connected to these folks!" which is...useless, really unless 'these folks' are unusually and blatantly toxic. Of that list, only Tim Eyman comes close and frankly I doubt he has the clout to turn an election regardless.
What he says regarding his policy positions will matter far more than the ties on that site since I really don't think most people are very familiar with that despite his name recognition, and he's not going to be coming out swinging with the crazy. Basically, if Dems are counting on turning him into the big bad GOP boogeyman to win this election they better dig up something better than 'gets some $$ from interest groups'.
I was thinking along similar lines.
The only things that really stand out for me about McKenna are the suit against HCR (against the wishes of the governor and the legislature) and writing Initiatives with Tim Eyman. There are certainly little factoids in there like refusing to prosecute donors and such, but they're tough to compress into a sound bite.
Rob McKenna will win unless there's some giant megawave of Democratic feeling through the country or Inslee or whoever is the Dem nominee really steps up their game and hits him hard when the opportunities arise.
Well, it matters because it's not like Snyder ran in Michigan on "I'm going to tax old people and give all their money to corporations, mwahahahaha!"
But that's basically the GOP platform and nobody seems particularly interested in bucking it.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
I agree with the earlier sentiment. Electing a republican, any republican, at this point in time to any elected position with the expectation that they be moderate is goosery.
McKenna wins it in a damn landslide here in WA unless something really weird happens. He's reasonably popular in the big population center even among liberals and hasn't been a raving nutter - the first really partisan thing I can recall him doing was getting on the ACA challenge, and I knew as soon as he did it he was looking to bolster his cred and get through to the general.
Honestly he's been a good AG and I'd be cool with it, although I probably wouldn't vote for him, if it weren't for the fact that recently elected GOP governors seem to be channeling their favorite bannana republic dictators. But unless he get's taken out in the primaries (and how is that going to happen, Rossi actually wins a race for the first time in a decade?) I think he's got it locked up. I guess King County could give him the finger over the ACA thing, but I doubt it.
This is why I posted a link to the Dem's hit site - people ought to know that he's been a really partisan Republican for years before the ACA lawsuit, he's just done a good job of hiding it. And I think that once we Dems get our messaging going, the needle will shift. Inslee has low state-wide name recognition and already does decent on polling, and the name recognition will get fixed in a big way. WA state Dems know the communications game much better than the national guys - we've been playing the "Republican scary boogeyman" card to rile up the base for several cycles in a row now and we've gotten good at it. It will definitely be the toughest race in WA this year, though. Cantwell and Obama will both walk across the finish line here, but the gubernatorial will be a knife fight.
He's been a partisan Republican in the sense that he's, you know, a fucking Republican and needs to win elections. Of course he gets contributions from goups like the Chamber of Commerce. I mean, what do you expect? That you go to look up a major Republican's fundraising sheet and see the Sierra Club and Greenpeace? He's a moderate Republican, but he's still a Republican. That entire piece is a laundry list of "He's totally connected to these folks!" which is...useless, really unless 'these folks' are unusually and blatantly toxic. Of that list, only Tim Eyman comes close and frankly I doubt he has the clout to turn an election regardless.
What he says regarding his policy positions will matter far more than the ties on that site since I really don't think most people are very familiar with that despite his name recognition, and he's not going to be coming out swinging with the crazy. Basically, if Dems are counting on turning him into the big bad GOP boogeyman to win this election they better dig up something better than 'gets some $$ from interest groups'.
This kind of writing won't pull independents, but McKenna has gotten Democratic votes in his runs for Attorney General and that won't be happening in 2012 if the Dems have anything to say about it.
Even though it's been more than three decades since Washington State swore in a Republican governor, that hasn't stopped Democratic insiders from privately shitting bricks over Attorney General Rob McKenna's impending 2012 gubernatorial run... and not just because he might win. It's what he might do with the office that has some Dems running scared.
After 30-plus years in the wilderness, GOPers are almost giddy over McKenna's prospects, if not with the man himself. "If he gets to the general election, he's an excellent candidate," one Republican operative confided on condition of anonymity. "Attorney general is the politically easiest job in the world. He's been doing press conferences with McGruff the Crime Dog for the past seven years."
McKenna's likely Democratic opponent, Jay Inslee, is "about as beatable a candidate as the Ds could nominate," this Republican says. "He has a long congressional voting record with plenty for all Washingtonians to dislike, and I don't really understand what case he'll make as an effective manager or accomplisher of great things."
Not exactly a measured critique—it under- estimates Inslee's passion, charisma, and force of character—but you can't argue with the fundamentals.
It is in this context that one can reasonably imagine a scenario unfolding that should be shockingly familiar. Swept into office on the crest of a recession-induced Big Red Wave, a newly elected Republican governor, backed by freshly minted legislative majorities, sets out to achieve with a stroke of a pen what just a few months before seemed an impossible right-wing fantasy: the total dismantling of the state's powerful public employees' unions through stripping them of their right to bargain collectively.
On the campaign trail, McKenna will rail against state workers—their cost-of-living increases, skyrocketing health care costs, and "fat" pensions—but of course, that's how all Republican candidates talk these days, so neither pundits nor plebs will take much notice. Sure, voters expect a Republican to be less union-friendly than his Democratic opponent, but after several straight Democrat- authored, all-cuts budgets filled with layoffs and furloughs and sundry wage and benefit concessions, even loyal union members will probably wonder, Could this guy really be much worse?
As the current debacle in Wisconsin—a conservative governor running roughshod over an otherwise Democratic, pro-union state—clearly demonstrates, the answer is a loud and resounding "YES!" Things could get much worse.
But wait, you say. Rob McKenna's not that kind of Republican. He's not a teabagger, you insist. He's a different kind of Republican... a moderate Republican... the kind of Republican who kinda shares our values, only maybe not quite enough to spend actual taxpayer money on them. He's the good kind of Republican, the reasonable, centrist, nonscary kind, the kind who brings an assortment of fresh doughnuts to the morning meeting, even though he doesn't even eat doughnuts, because the rest of us like them, and he's tolerant that way. You know, just like he personally opposes abortion but would never, ever do anything to restrict a woman's right to choose. Ever.
McKenna, we've been told, is a "Dan Evans Republican," what back East we used to call a "Rockefeller Republican." You know, like Slade Gorton before the other Washington sucked the life-spirit from his embittered, withered husk. McKenna's the good-government/policy-wonk/reformist type of Republican, like old-timers say former Seattle City Council member Bruce Chapman once was, way back before he founded the "intelligent design"–spewing Discovery Institute and metamorphosed into a mutant, right-wing, Christianist nutcase intent on undermining what's left of our nation's science education.
In other words, Rob McKenna is allegedly one of those mythical mainstream Republicans. And we know this because trusted media sources like the Seattle Times repeatedly tell us it's true. Newspapers around the state will give their endorsements to McKenna because they believe it.
Unfortunately, as comforting as this myth might be, experience tells us that mainstream Republicans are as extinct today as those dinosaurs Chapman's designer- God whimsically placed into the fossil record as part of His inscrutable plan to confuse paleontologists. And even if mainstream Republicans as a species aren't extinct, McKenna's fossil record clearly tells us that he's never been any such thing.
"The grassroots movement reflected in the Tea Party is exactly what this country is about," McKenna declared to the Snohomish County Republican Women's Club this past October, in a speech most notable for its Tea Party toadyism. Even when trotting out clichéd conservative economic talking points, McKenna can't help but play to the teabaggers, saying the need to place "fewer regulations, fewer burdens upon our employers," for example, is "what the Tea Party's about. It's an economic movement, a fiscal movement. We get that. The lefties don't get that."
And who, pray tell, did McKenna's speech define as "the lefties"? Karl Marx? No. Seattle's Saddam-loving, hippie, peacenik congressman Jim McDermott? Uh-uh. Dirty liberal bloggers like me? Believe it or not, my name didn't even come up once.
No, according to McKenna, the leftiest of lefties, the man who epitomizes the far extreme left wing of the Democratic Party, is none other than... President Barack Obama.
"We have a man who, as president, is far to the left of center, farther to the left of center, I should say, than any American president we have ever seen. Farther to the left than FDR."
Really? If President Obama is that far left of center, where the hell does McKenna place our nation's ideological axis... Alabama, circa 1960? Perhaps it's all a matter of perspective. After all, this is the same speech in which McKenna described conservative columnist David Brooks as a "liberal." Uh-huh.
But McKenna moderately continued...
"FDR, by the way, among other little known facts, was strongly opposed to the unionization of public employees. He understood why you don't need the unionization of public employees. And why it would be dangerous for it to happen."
It's the public employees' unions, McKenna explains, ironically using liberal icon FDR for cover, that are driving our state "bankrupt." That's no surprise, given McKenna's long pedigree of labor-busting politics, dating back to his anti-union antics on the King County Council.
As a councilman, on five separate occasions, McKenna refused to approve collective bargaining agreements between the county and public workers, opposing contracts with animal control officers, social workers, and others. He led efforts to prevent the county from doing business with union shops, bizarrely disparaging as "racist and sexist" an ordinance requiring the county to hire union apprentices. In 1998, McKenna even voted against a motion that urged an employer to (gasp) "bargain with its employees in good faith" and innocuously supported the "fair treatment of workers." And while McKenna likes to talk the talk on government spending, as chair of the council's budget committee in 2001, he proposed swiping money from a fund set aside to pay scheduled raises to unionized workers while actually increasing spending.
As attorney general, McKenna has continued his efforts to undermine unions, and in a very prominent manner. Backed by state and national anti-union groups like the ironically named Evergreen Freedom Foundation and National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, McKenna's first appearance before the US Supreme Court was an appeal of a state supreme court ruling that had granted teachers' unions the right to use members' dues for political purposes. After the Bush-packed conservative court overturned the state ruling, McKenna hailed the decision as an "extremely important" precursor that "clears the way" for new legislation to enact further restrictions of union political spending.
And if his anti-union sympathies weren't obvious enough, in 2010, acting as the keynote speaker at an Association of Washington Business luncheon, McKenna presented its better workplace award to Cairncross & Hempelmann, a law firm that advises managers on how to see the "warning signs of union organizing efforts" and "put policies in place to limit unionization efforts on your properties." Because nothing makes a workplace "better" like busting unions.
This is a politician who is no friend of labor, who has used his office to work against the interests of workers and their right to organize, who has accused state workers of bankrupting the state, and who has even labeled the very institution of the public employees' union as "dangerous." But nothing is more indicative of McKenna's far-right, anti-union, pro-teabagger philosophy than his aggressive leadership in attempting to kill organized labor's decades-old, number-one policy agenda: Obama's health care reform act and the benefits it would bring to millions of Washington citizens and businesses.
Indeed, far from being just one tagalong attorney general out of many, McKenna proudly touts himself as one of the primary instigators behind a multistate lawsuit against the health care reform legislation—a lawsuit that has so far resulted in one Florida judge tossing out as unconstitutional the entire reform package.
In an interview with the Christian Science Monitor, McKenna claimed that "two of us got together, and others joined us," clearly placing himself at the lawsuit's genesis. And in December of 2009, three months before the final bill was even passed, McKenna told the Olympian that he "look[ed] forward" to working with other attorneys general in challenging the constitutionality of the act's provisions. This was a lawsuit that had been planned for months, long before the bill's provisions were finalized or the legal issues they might raise were fully known. When McKenna and other attorneys general circulated a letter questioning the constitutionality of the unfinished bill, even the Seattle Times editorial board had to recognize that "the signatories are all Republicans and speak with political motive."
More than the naked, teabagger-pandering politics of it all, what should be most disturbing to voters about McKenna's involvement in the health care lawsuit is the way he's consistently misrepresented its intended goal, by repeatedly implying that most of the health care reforms could survive, even if his lawsuit succeeds. From the official Q&A on his office's website:
"Attorney General McKenna believes challenging the two unconstitutional provisions will ultimately not prevent Congress from implementing other features of the health care reform legislation if they see fit... Attorney General McKenna continues to believe that individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion provisions may be deemed unconstitutional without overturning the entire health care reform act."
Recognizing that much of the health care reform package is popular with voters, and would greatly benefit Washington State, Mc-Kenna repeats this line again and again. At a June 4, 2010, conference with the conservative Washington Policy Center, McKenna insisted that "we can only challenge those provisions that we think are constitutionally defective," but "it is inconceivable that one lawsuit could bring down the entire measure." And in a March 24, 2010, interview on TVW, McKenna claimed that he actually likes many of the provisions, bluntly telling NPR's Austin Jenkins:
"You can't overturn a 2,400-page law with a trillion dollars in spending and 80 new federal agencies with one lawsuit, nor do we attempt to... The governor and the legislative leaders are making it sound like this lawsuit challenges the provision in the bill regarding preexisting conditions for health insurance; it does not. That it challenges the provisions that 26-year-olds can stay on their parents' health insurance; it does not. It does not address these many, many provisions that they keep citing... The provisions we've been talking about regarding 26-year-olds and preexisting conditions, they are all going to take effect this year. They are not the subject of the lawsuit; they're not affected by it at all."
Huh. That seems pretty clear. So... um... how does McKenna explain the request for summary judgment filed in his very own lawsuit?
Plaintiffs have established that the Act's Individual Mandate and Medicaid provisions are unconstitutional. Because each of these portions is essential to the [Affordable Care Act (ACA)] as a whole, neither can be severed. It follows, as a matter of law, that the unconstitutionality of either renders the entire Act unconstitutional. Accordingly, Plaintiffs ask, as requested in Counts One and Four of the Amended Complaint, that the Court declare the entire ACA unconstitutional and enjoin its enforcement.
In the court of public opinion, McKenna has repeatedly argued that he's only challenging two unconstitutional provisions of the health care act, that the more popular components of the health care act are "not affected" at all by his lawsuit. Yet in a court of law—you know, the court that really matters—McKenna argues that these two provisions cannot be severed from the act as a whole and thus asks the judge to toss out the entire package. Yes, even the provisions regarding 26-year-olds and preexisting conditions.
How lawyerly of him. No, how totally fucking dishonest.
This is a politician who will clearly say anything to win election, but voters of all stripes should have no illusions about what McKenna will try to do once elected. He will work against the interests of working Washingtonians and for the interests of his big-business corporate patrons. And just like his Wisconsin counterpart, if elected governor and given the opportunity, he would crush organized labor in a New York minute... while patiently explaining to reporters in his trademark dry, dispassionate, pseudogeeky manner that he was doing anything but.
What really makes Democrats so nervous is that while no Republican can get his ass kicked in populous, heavily Democratic King County and still manage to win statewide, thanks to his unearned reputation as "a different kind of Republican," McKenna has a history of far outperforming the rest of the GOP ticket around these parts.
In 2008, John McCain drew less than 30 percent of the King County vote and Dino Rossi pulled in barely 35 percent, but McKenna actually won the county with an impressive 54 percent of the vote, far more than any other Republican on the ballot. Even in 2004, when he lost the county to local favorite Deborah Senn in their race for the open attorney general seat, McKenna still managed to garner nearly 46 percent in King County, more than enough to help lead him to a comfortable victory statewide.
So why would McKenna risk the moderate, "different kind of Republican" image he's so carefully crafted, arguably the foundation of his electoral strength, to pander to his party's teabagger fringe? Because as much as his boring, centrist facade might help him in the general, he still has to get through the primary, and the Tea Party has a track record of knocking off establishment GOPers.
"While there were and still are die-hard Dino Rossi people, and die-hard Slade Gorton people, and die-hard enthusiasts for the GOP congresspeople, there are no die-hard Rob McKenna people, for various good reasons," my Republican insider friend says. "Nobody is going to fall on a sword for Rob. I still think it's possible he could lose the primary under the right conditions." Those right conditions: a Tea Party attack from the right squeezing McKenna between them and a truly centrist Republican on his left (or even a conservative Democrat like state auditor Brian Sonntag).
The trick for McKenna is how to maintain that delicate balance between convincing Republicans that he is who he says he is, while reassuring soft Dems and Independents that he's still who he's long said he was, a high-wire act made all the more difficult in the face of a stiff wind blowing in from the right.
Fortunately for McKenna, our local media has his back. McKenna the moderate is a media creation, a figment of the collective imagination of a punditocracy in love with his sweet, sexy, reporter-shield-law-promoting, public-records-access-defending ass while being emotionally invested in the notion that the Democrats' three-decades-plus domination of the governor's mansion is somehow bad for democracy.
That's why—despite the fact that McKenna opposes abortion, opposes marriage equality, opposes the right of public employees to organize, opposes health care reform, and has consistently allied himself with traditional right-wing "think tanks," organizations, corporations, and assholes (how's your latest initiative going, Tim?) on issues ranging from regulation to education to tax limitation to light rail (a project he unsuccessfully dedicated his council career to blocking)—our media continues to spin McKenna into one of those moderate-centrist-enviro-different-kind-of-Republicans Joel Connelly swears he once had drinks with while hiking in the back of Bill Clinton's limo. Or something.
Which is why two years from now, the idea of a Governor McKenna transforming Olympia into Madison on the Sound isn't all that far-fetched. And when the revenue forecast once again comes in "lower than expected," presenting lawmakers with yet another multibillion-dollar budget gap, and the draconian cuts McKenna proposes in response this time include the fundamental right of public employees to bargain collectively—when 80,000 angry union members and their supporters then descend upon the Capitol, and the schools shut down due to mass sick-ins, as union leaders ponder the consequences of planning Washington's first general strike since 1919—when all that happens, Mc- Kenna will calmly put on his glasses, step before the cameras, and cite FDR in defense of his union-bashing agenda. And the next day, the editorial boards will applaud him for his bipartisanship, remarking on how lucky we are to have a governor who is such a moderate, centrist, different kind of Republican.
Well, yeah. That's my point. If you're going to beat him it's not going to be on 'look at these CoC donations' and 'look as what these moderate republicans have done after winning gubernatorial elections' is a damn tough sell, because you have to first show that these new GOPs govs have done crazy shit AND make a convincing argument that McKenna will do the same.
Good luck with that. 'That other GoP governor is fucking nutty' does not an election win.
I think that once the Democratic message machine gets going and starts educating Democratic voters, he won't get 54% of King County's vote like he did in 2008, or even 46% like he did in 04. And that makes his road to election harder.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
I was actually at the assembly where McKenna made his announcement. He frequently cited healthcare as a main reason WA State went over budget, and when he brought up his fight to challenge health care in the courts, he got a huge applause from the audience.
I think that McKenna is a republican who spends a lot of time with republican buddies, and they assume that their views are the same as the rest of the country. I think that McKenna bought into the tea party hype and was betting that the Obama administration would be viewed as a failure in the 2012 election, so he planned to make a calculated risk to make his Gubernatorial run a referendum against the Obama administration. That's why he signed up on the HCR lawsuit; so that he could go on the record as taking a stand against Obama from really early on.
But now it looks like Obama is going to take 2012 in a cakewalk. Obama might have his faults, but the republicans are completely imploding.
It should be noted that when Rossi ran in 2008, he knew that Obama was unstoppable, so he actually tried to swing the Obama vote to his side by campaigning on the "Change" message. If McKenna played that same game for 2012, he might have a good chance of winning. As it stands, McKenna bet against Obama.
So this should be an interesting election. Washington elections are heavily decided by ground campaigns. McKenna has an edge over Rossi in this area, because he's more popular. But once again, he won't have much luck trying to appeal to the Obama vote.
Posts
She didn't do everything I wanted, but she did a lot of really good things.
Rob McKenna was one of the AGs who tried to repeal the HealthCare Reform, and I hope people realise that. He's got name recognition and a lot of across-the-board appeal, so unless someone can come out and really put up a fight on the D side I think he's going to win.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Perdue is polling pretty low right now, and I really think it's almost all economy related.
Both senators (neither of which are up for re-election in 2012) are doing pretty bad, but are more favored than unfavored, and Obama is currently the front runner going into the presidential.
But for some reason, Perdue is trailing by 7 points in a PPP poll, which seems odd, by comparison.
She'll probably end up losing, which is going to realllllly suck.
http://robmckennaforgovernor.com
It is a project of the WA State Democrats explaining how right wing McKenna really is. His moderate reputation is built on lies and a sympathetic media.
Meanwhile, his opponent, David Williams, has gone full speed ahead on the crazy train and is calling for repeal of the 17th amendment.
Steam | Twitter
So far for the R's Mike Pence has thrown his hat in.
On the Dem side we've got John Gregg so far.
...
We're so fucked. We're fuckitty fuck fuck fucked. Mike Godamn Pence is probably going to become IN's next governor.
@Sammich, did anyone suggest that? Or are you just doing your David [strike]Brooks[/strike] Broder impression again?
Brooks, Broder, bah. D'oh.
I think the opposition's voice ought to be heard. The Seattle Times has been telling people for years how moderate McKenna is, I think it's worth considering an argument that he is in fact quite right wing. That website uses facts and documented statements. If they say something that's not true, I'd like to hear what it is.
They're not honest? Tell me what on the website isn't true.
Edit: Fair enough. Just wanted to put it out there.
Of all the things on that list this is the one that, properly publicized, will hurt his campaign the most.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Edit: and where is the talk about Kucinich vying for Inslee's house seat if he runs for governor coming from? I've seen it in 2 places now and that seems completely out of left field.
Honestly he's been a good AG and I'd be cool with it, although I probably wouldn't vote for him, if it weren't for the fact that recently elected GOP governors seem to be channeling their favorite bannana republic dictators. But unless he get's taken out in the primaries (and how is that going to happen, Rossi actually wins a race for the first time in a decade?) I think he's got it locked up. I guess King County could give him the finger over the ACA thing, but I doubt it.
[Edit]
And those 'Man, look what a conservative nutjob McKenna is!' points really come off as reaching. Of course he's gladhanding with the state and national Republican donors and big names. He's a Republicn elected official. That's not exactly damning. I do think his actual policy positions are an unknown to many people, but the election will take care of that, and I don't think he's so far right that he won't take the election in the end.
This is why I posted a link to the Dem's hit site - people ought to know that he's been a really partisan Republican for years before the ACA lawsuit, he's just done a good job of hiding it. And I think that once we Dems get our messaging going, the needle will shift. Inslee has low state-wide name recognition and already does decent on polling, and the name recognition will get fixed in a big way. WA state Dems know the communications game much better than the national guys - we've been playing the "Republican scary boogeyman" card to rile up the base for several cycles in a row now and we've gotten good at it. It will definitely be the toughest race in WA this year, though. Cantwell and Obama will both walk across the finish line here, but the gubernatorial will be a knife fight.
What he says regarding his policy positions will matter far more than the ties on that site since I really don't think most people are very familiar with that despite his name recognition, and he's not going to be coming out swinging with the crazy. Basically, if Dems are counting on turning him into the big bad GOP boogeyman to win this election they better dig up something better than 'gets some $$ from interest groups'.
I was thinking along similar lines.
The only things that really stand out for me about McKenna are the suit against HCR (against the wishes of the governor and the legislature) and writing Initiatives with Tim Eyman. There are certainly little factoids in there like refusing to prosecute donors and such, but they're tough to compress into a sound bite.
Rob McKenna will win unless there's some giant megawave of Democratic feeling through the country or Inslee or whoever is the Dem nominee really steps up their game and hits him hard when the opportunities arise.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
But that's basically the GOP platform and nobody seems particularly interested in bucking it.
This kind of writing won't pull independents, but McKenna has gotten Democratic votes in his runs for Attorney General and that won't be happening in 2012 if the Dems have anything to say about it.
Good luck with that. 'That other GoP governor is fucking nutty' does not an election win.
He was chair of the McCain campaign in Washington state. He persecutes medical marijuana patients. He soft-pedals investigations into gasoline price-fixing and refused to join other Attorneys General in a lawsuit trying to raise fuel emissions standards. To say nothing of his policies on the King County Council, detailed in the article above.
I think that once the Democratic message machine gets going and starts educating Democratic voters, he won't get 54% of King County's vote like he did in 2008, or even 46% like he did in 04. And that makes his road to election harder.
Is that our working definition?
I think that McKenna is a republican who spends a lot of time with republican buddies, and they assume that their views are the same as the rest of the country. I think that McKenna bought into the tea party hype and was betting that the Obama administration would be viewed as a failure in the 2012 election, so he planned to make a calculated risk to make his Gubernatorial run a referendum against the Obama administration. That's why he signed up on the HCR lawsuit; so that he could go on the record as taking a stand against Obama from really early on.
But now it looks like Obama is going to take 2012 in a cakewalk. Obama might have his faults, but the republicans are completely imploding.
It should be noted that when Rossi ran in 2008, he knew that Obama was unstoppable, so he actually tried to swing the Obama vote to his side by campaigning on the "Change" message. If McKenna played that same game for 2012, he might have a good chance of winning. As it stands, McKenna bet against Obama.
So this should be an interesting election. Washington elections are heavily decided by ground campaigns. McKenna has an edge over Rossi in this area, because he's more popular. But once again, he won't have much luck trying to appeal to the Obama vote.