January 26, 2007
From the pro-Tebelius camp
I got two responses to my invitiation for Diane Tebelius's supporters to contact me and make the case for her re-election. Both calls were from people I know from party circles and whom I respect. One offered to speak on the record -- Monica Tracey, a King County activist and event organizer, who's been on the Executive Board for four years and is now stepping down.
Tracey points to Tebelius experience as chairman and prior service as National Committeewoman and feels that Tebelius has done a good job in general. She recognizes that the last year has been very difficult for state Republicans, largely because of the President's unpopularity here. She feels that Tebelius worked hard and raised as much money as the climate allowed, and settled the debt from the contest.
She believes that under Tebelius's leadership the Executive Board meetings are "congenial and run well", that Tebelius has "proven that she's capable of getting along with everybody", that she's a "great match up to Dwight Pelz" and the she "gets our message out there well".
I asked Tracey if she could explain why Tebelius was facing serious opposition. She thought that it was because Diane is "independently minded" and always does what she thinks is right for the party even if others sometimes disagree with her priorities.
I asked about finances, if Tracey knew anything about the allegations that Tebelius used hard dollars to pay for party operations and she said that that had been alleged, but there wasn't any evidence to support it. I asked if she knew how much money Tebelius raised herself. She said that all of the accounting reports were presented to the Executive Board. I countered that some on the Executive Board had raised concerns about the accounting reports and asked if she could share the reports that were distributed to the board. She declined, explaining that the reports are confidential.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 26, 2007
10:07 AM | Email This
That is total and absolute BS.
Diane was asked repeatedly for those numbers at the last meeting - about 5 times over the course of 30 minutes.
And then when Diane delivered them she read them quickly off from a sheet of paper instead of handing around a printout. This despite objections. If there is nothing to hide, why hide it?
Who was there you might ask: Jeff McMorris, Mike Young, Freddi Simpson, Ann Adams, Phil Bevis, and so on.
Just so EVERYONE knows, Monica is running Diane's reelection campaign. There are also rumors that she is one of the people behind the anonymous nasty letter campaign that started a couple of days before the meeting above.
I suspect the real debate is not so much centered on leadership style as it is on where in the political spectrum each of the candidates is perceived to be.
It a battle between the center and the right for dominance.
I bears reminding though that the right, while clearly more loyal and motivated within the party, has not won an election in my lifetime in Washington. Electoral successes have been from the center, where most Washingtonians are.
Given the failure at the polls this past November, I seriously doubt that Esser can lose. I hope he will moderate his positions more toward the center, but then again I had hoped more folks would have recognized the insanity of abandoning Iraq in the last election.
Diane has no politics. She is all about the Party of Diane.
If you know three people who have talked to her who have different political views, ask them (separately) about what she told them about her views.
It will be like a prism. Everyone gets a cute little picture tailored to their views.
At the center, there is no truth, just emptiness and the gnawing hunger pangs of a huge and ever-starving ego.
I hope he will moderate his positions more toward the center
Could you be more specific about which Luke Esser positions are too far to the right for your taste?
5. I think Monica is a really nice person. But this is why when PCO's elect their state committee members, they need to have these conversations BEFORE they elect them. I was Monica's challenger in the '04 reorganizational meeting. I lost. She's excellent at organizing events and is congenial (and values congeniality) and I'm sure has given plenty of her talents to the party, but she doesn't have a clear picture of why we're losing elections. Money has something to do with it, but it isn't all.
Hey TV Fan,
Do you LIVE with Diane? Good LORD, you know her well!
7. the right, while clearly more loyal and motivated within the party, has not won an election in my lifetime in Washington.
Maybe I'm making an assumption that you're older than 12, or have been in this state longer than 12 years, but 1994 was an overwhelming victory for 'the right' in this state. Thirty three members to 60 (and then, 62) for the House and 21 to 24 (and in 1996, the majority) for the Senate. Our Congressional delegation went from one seat - Jennifer Dunn - after 1992 to Hastings, Nethercutt, Metcalf, Smith, Tate, White and Dunn after 1994.
And how did that happen? A solid, conservative message and strong leadership from both Olympia and the State Party. Catering to the middle simply doesn't get it done. Put forward solid, conservative - key word there CONSERVATIVE - ideals that the base will support, and the middle follows.
deadwood @2 -
Are we talking about the Luke Esser that was endorsed by, among others, the P-I, the Washington Conservation Voters, the Service Employees International Union, Aerospace Machinists 751, and the WA State Nurses Assn?
( http://lukeesser.com/endorsements.html )
Given those endorsements, if he is representative of the right wing of the state GOP, where exactly does that put Tibelius, whom you associate with the center of the state GOP?
YOU ARE SO RIGHT.
We just need to spread our message with a smile and not a snarl.
One advantage Luke has over Diane is that he actually has a sense of humor.
In 2005, the Washington Conservative Union awarded Luke Esser a conservative ranking of 87%, down a little bit from his lifetime cumulative score of 91%. In 2006, Esser's ranking plummeted to 62%, lowering his lifetime cumulative to 84%. Now here I sit, as a newly minted conservative in a very liberal state, posting on an allegedly conservative blog, trying to convince supposedly right of center moderates that Luke Esser is no Konservative Kool-Aid drinker. What is wrong with this picture? How liberal or moderate does a man have to be to be acceptable to SP.COM readers?
Think what you will of conservatives, but I think it is safe to say that Esser will not eat our children for breakfast.
It is also interesting that the topic has morphed from a pro-Tebelius thread into a defend-Esser thread. How did that happen?
Gals & Goals:
You need to be ore specific on the wrongs Ms Tebilus has done as chair of the WA GOP Party
I think the onus, as least as far as the thread title is concerned, is for the pro-Tebelius posters to be specific about the things done right by Diane. No pun intended.
You see. Mark, Diane has been given ample opportunity to come here and present her views.
If she wants the job, she has to interview for it... just like Luke.
And Luke, at least, answered some questions.
Do you Esser people really want to get this dirty?
This is shameful, look I am not supporting Diane
but this has gone to far. Is winning really
worth maligning someone like that? Enough is
enough we all know who you want to win. There's
no reason to sink this low.
15. The "Gay Lynn" comment that phil mentions in #14 was garbage and I deleted it. I have no reason to believe it came from Esser's people. It was just the kind of trash that we occasionally get from drive-by idiots and that I delete when I catch it.
I think "gay lynn" is a troll. Not that sexual scandals are unheard of, Lord knows we certainly have them, but the above is no way to credibly make that claim.
Gals & Goals:
You need to be more specific on the wrongs Ms Tebilus has done as chair of the WA GOP Party