Who will receive your vote for Washington's next governor? I imagine most people reading this, who are eligible to vote, will quickly reply that it is Dino Rossi. A handful of others will provide the name of the incumbent, Christine Gregoire.
But there are other choices, if you are for some reason unhappy with those two choices. Very few Republicans seem to dislike Rossi, but for those who do, there are other candidates on the Republican side.
For example, there's Javier Lopez, who, like most Republican candidates, is against waste and fraud in government, in favor of accountability, thinks we need tougher laws against sexual abuse of children, and has a strong solution to the energy crisis: he has invented a car that is fueled by air.
Republican John W. Aiken has an energy plan, too: purchasing hundreds of thousands of acres to have government-grown ethanol from sugar beets. He also wants to have huge increases in affordable housing subsidies, year-round schooling (with longer hours because parents can't always pick up their kids until later), and casinos at highway rest stops.
Then there is former Republican Will Baker (watch your speaker's volume level ... crank it up for a beat that matches the hair!), now of the Reform Party, who is perhaps best known as the Republican candidate for State Auditor in 2004, who was disowned by the Party when it was revealed that he was being habitually arrested for disrupting public meetings.
The Democrats have another French Chris: Christian Pierre Joubert. He is perhaps hoping to win on name similarity, but he also could be hoping his compelling platform of complete and total socialism will win the day, by granting new "fundamental freedoms" such as freedom from diseases, pollution, waste, war, excessive mortgage, debt, homelessness, ignorance, alienation, recession, hunger, desert, world misery, injustice, and tyranny.
If you were looking for a candidate to the immanentize of the eschaton, Joubert is your man. And he has a plan to do it: his first act as governor would be a toxicity test of every person in Washington, followed by true universal health care (including, of course, holistic medicine), which will be the cornerstone to his "New Holistic and Spiritual Civilisation."
The Green Party has is own candidate, Duff Badgley. But honestly, how can the Greens top Joubert? I'll tell you how: by forcing Boeing to stop making airplanes and weapons, and start making solar and wind power equipment, and making it a crime to ride in a car by yourself!
There are, of course, several independents running as well. James White -- a Boeing airplane inspector, so I'd love to see him debate Badgley -- wants to do silly things like respect constitutional rights and hold government accountable. Yeah, keep smoking that doobie, man.
Mohammad Hassan Said, M.D., Ph.D., DPH, MACP, FAAFP, is for states' rights, wanting to delegate the power to declare war and regulate international trade to state legislatures. He would also pull us immediately our of Iraq and work on a one-state solution for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Oh, and he wants to protect us from the Jewish threat. (Just a friendly tip: if your name is Mohammad and you don't want people to think you're a radical Muslim, don't say things like "AIPAC and other Jewish Zionist Lobbies who represent less than 2% of American People are using the United States through their mighty power in the News Media, Financial Institutions, Hollywood and Entertainment Industry, Both Political Parties, Congress and the White House. ..." Hope that helps!)
Last, but not least (well, maybe least, it's hard to say, really), is Christopher Tudor, who seems to be saying that Rossi is right about all the problems -- lack of government innovation, throwing money at problems, unreasonable taxes, lack of transportation growth, weak public education, and so on -- but also believes that a governor without the support of anyone in the legislature is the best way to actually fix those problems. Worked well for John Adams!
I hope this has been a useful guide for you. While none of these candidates have raised cash amounting to even one-quarter of their filing fee, they paid that filing fee and deserve to be heard. Or, seen. Or, something.
Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.
Posted by pudge at August 05, 2008 08:31 AM | Email ThisNo, they will not. TURN OFF YOUR MIND-READING AND FUTURE-TELLING DEVICE, RICHARD POPE, IT IS BROKEN.
One person. You say there's a lot of them. Should be easy.
Good luck!
Posted by: pudge on August 5, 2008 09:10 AMOh by the way, obfusCATOr... it's LOSES not looses... and it will still be LOSES when the chrissy queen does it...again.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on August 5, 2008 10:55 AMI wonder, what has R.Pope ever been 'successful' at?
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on August 5, 2008 11:30 AMWhile I agree Aiken looks like a liberal, and probably is in some big respects, it DOES NOT follow that "the Republican party is limited in Conservative values." The Republican Party is a big tent party. We don't exclude people. That he got on some committee and some people he didn't actually know recognized him doesn't mean anything, either, obviously.
If he actually got the support of a broad section of the party, that would mean something, but I see no evidence that he has.
By the way, if Republicans don't "exclude people", where did the term "RINO", or "Republican in Name Only" come from? You know, which is it?
Posted by: cpk on August 5, 2008 12:08 PMFalse. First, yes, Rossi is a Republican. Second, no, he did not state his preference as "GOP Party."
Wrong on both counts. Get informed!
Perhaps you are confused. I'll spell it out for you: Rossi listed his party preference as "GOP," not "GOP Party." The Secretary of State chose to render it as "GOP Party." If Dino had stated his party preference as "Republican Party" and the Sec. State were consistent, then it would have been rendered "Republican Party Party." Sorry, the fault here is Reed's, not Dino's.
The filing form from Reed's office even gave "G.O.P." as a legitimate example! It reads, "If you would like to state your preference, fill in the name of the party, up to 16 characters. The first letter of the party preference will be capitalized (e.g., Democratic). If you want to use initials, separate each letter with a period (e.g., G.O.P.)"
I know, I know, stupid facts getting in the way of a good story. Life's rough.
And I only say supporters of Republicans are not Republicans if they (duh) refuse to support Republican candidates. So that Aiken has been a supporter of Republicans does not mean there's anything wrong with the Republicans just because he has non-conservative views. Again: duh.
For elected officials, I somewhat agree. For supporters? No, I do not. I welcome anyone as a supporter.
Of course the GOP is not an "unassailable entity of Conservatism." It NEVER has been, and NEVER will be, and the GOP has only ever won power in our lifetimes by being a big tent party.
Reagan picked GHW Bush as his running mate for a reason ... if you weed out the inaptly-named "RINOs" -- a term that literally makes no sense, since they have as long a history in the GOP as conservatives do, and have held the office of President a lot more than conservatives have in our lifetimes (Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Bush I and II) -- there will not be enough of the party left to win elections.
I am in favor of a conservative Republican Party. I am not in favor of "weeding out" people I disagree with 10 percent of the time in order to achieve some mythical ideological purity that never exists, ever, in any mainstream political party, anywhere in the world, except those in dictatorial and fascist regimes.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/373453_hiringfreeze05.html
Now at least she can say she did SOMETHING.
Posted by: NW Denizen on August 5, 2008 12:39 PMPope is a different animal. His drive is to be "important," something that is unlikely to happen, and he is largely like a man without a country. (read "man without a party")
Haha, this coming from a person who's belongs to the party that continuously sponsors legislation that pretty much voids the 4th Amendment. Everyone knows Rossi's unfunded roads proposal is a joke, much like his 2nd run at the Governors seat. Keep up your false hope Ragnut, we'll see it come crashing down again in November.
Yes, it was the Democrats that voided the 4th Amendment with the 16th Amendment. And it is the Democrats who deny the existence of the 9th and 10th Amendments, who seek to undermine the 2nd, who cherry-pick the 5th and 14th ... and so on.
Rossi will win. Gregoire is going to lose based solely on her record.
The carnage would make the California Recall Election look like the Harvard Debating Club.
Posted by: Cliff on August 5, 2008 02:41 PMFor elected officials, I somewhat agree. For supporters? No, I do not. I welcome anyone as a supporter.
Of course the GOP is not an "unassailable entity of Conservatism." It NEVER has been, and NEVER will be, and the GOP has only ever won power in our lifetimes by being a big tent party.
Reagan picked GHW Bush as his running mate for a reason ... if you weed out the inaptly-named "RINOs" -- a term that literally makes no sense, since they have as long a history in the GOP as conservatives do, and have held the office of President a lot more than conservatives have in our lifetimes (Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Bush I and II) -- there will not be enough of the party left to win elections.
I am in favor of a conservative Republican Party. I am not in favor of "weeding out" people I disagree with 10 percent of the time in order to achieve some mythical ideological purity that never exists, ever, in any mainstream political party, anywhere in the world, except those in dictatorial and fascist regimes.
Best post in the history of SP.
If half the people on the right who posted here understood this, we'd be in a much, much better position then we currently are.
I'd quibble with only one thing: Eisenhower was probably the most conservative President we've had in modern history other then Reagan, certainly on foreign policy issues, and in no small part in fiscal matters as well. He gets crap from conservatives because he didn't try to undo the New Deal, something he had absolutely no mandate to do and something he would have failed at doing spectacularly if he had tried. He took the country as he found it, kept it safe and kept it prosperous by knowing his limitations. He was a very wise and great man.
His other sin was his court appointments, but it's important to remember, that Reagan made some serious mistakes too in that area, and that they were less excusable then Eisenhower's, since by that time we had a better sense of how the liberals were going to use the judiciary, and we had better vetting systems. Eisenhower had literally no vetting system as we currently understand it.
Posted by: Cliff on August 5, 2008 02:49 PMSo, your Al Qaeda terrorist friends are upset? Boo frickin' hoo.
Posted by: NW Denizen on August 5, 2008 03:44 PM
More like an ultra-paranoid Govt. entity overreaching and degrading the rights as citizens that were given to us by our founding fathers on a document. I thought the GOP was against the idea of an "evolving" Constitution. Guess that's just more hot air from the "do as we say not as we do" party.
First, James is not a FORMER Boeing employee, unless he got fired after I talked with him at Noon today. He works every day, inspecting wings on the 777 program.
James is probably the most family friendly candidate, believes that the gub'mint should get out of the family, and does respect the Constitution, and Rule of Law.
James also does not ingest illegal drugs, or even legal ones. He is a good, solid working stiff like me, who is running because he has seen the results of an out of control and intrusive government.
Have a chance? Probably not, but he is not a whack-job like some others, and you would like him, and his politics, if you met him.
Like I said, he just lives down the road from you.
The Geezer
Posted by: The Geezer on August 5, 2008 05:36 PMI was joking. By saying "keep smoking that doobie, man," I was being ironic, since what he has to say makes absolutely perfect sense to me. Other than running against Dino Rossi, I liked everything I read about him.
As to "former," I misread, thanks for the correction, I'll fix it soon.
Posted by: pudge on August 5, 2008 07:01 PMI am TOTALLY CONFIDENT that John Aiken and Javier Lopez (the only avowed Republican Party candidates on the primary ballot) will draw more votes between them, than will be received by Christian Joubert (the other Democratic Party candidate, besides the incumbent Governor).
You basically call me a moron for making this prediction, but are you willing to stand up for the opposite prediction?
Frankly, I think Aiken and Lopez would outpoll Joubert, even if Dino Rossi was listed as a Republican. Christine Gregoire is the incumbent, and generally incumbents have less defection to minor intraparty rivals in the primary, than do challengers. But the "G.0.P. Party" listing for Rossi will tend to increase the votes for Aiken and Lopez even further.
Posted by: Richard Pope on August 5, 2008 07:07 PMRepublicans are only people that vote for republicans all the time? Hmm... Guess I am not a republican... it is that damn conscious getting in the way.
I guess you will have to call me a small government supporter who wishes the republicans would run people I could support.
Posted by: Lysander on August 5, 2008 09:55 PMYou are a moron for being totally confident about something that you clearly don't have enough information about in order to justify your confidence.
It would be like if I said I am totally confident the Mariners will make the playoffs in the next few years. Yeah, I suppose, maybe. But based on what? Nothing significant.
I sincerely doubt you're right, and I am going to be here to laugh at you when you're wrong. If you are right, you will get no credit for making a wild prediction that just happened to be right.
Lysander: you're a liar, as usual. I never said nor implied what you said I did. Get bent. And if you lie again I will just remove your comment.
What I find intriguing is Marilyn Montgomery, the Constitution Party candidate for Secretary of State. She might get quite a few votes and surprise people for two reasons:
1. Republican's still detest Sam Reed for not doing anything about the screwed up elections in 2004.
2. Marilyn is the only candidate who mentions fixing the election system in her candidate statement in the voter's guide.
After carefully reading up each candidate, I chose to vote for her for these reasons. I hope she makes a good showing.
Posted by: blindman on August 5, 2008 11:57 PMHe's interesting for one reason: he's f'ing nuts.
His candidate statement in the voter's guide includes:
Our governor must convene a Climate Emergency session of the legislature now to enact emergency World War II-type laws:
• Divert Boeing to manufacture of solar and wind power equipment.
• Vastly increase public transport. Poor ride free.
• Outlaw Single Occupancy Vehicles, except where no public transport exists.
• Impose aggressive, corporate carbon taxes.
• Assess steep, progressive individual carbon taxes. Poor exempted.
• Establish industry, regional and governmental carbon caps.
• Outlaw carbon trading.
• Begin personal carbon rationing.
• Channel carbon tax funds to poor, offsetting high food, housing and transportation costs.
• Carbon taxes fund global Rainforest Protection.
• Demand full withdrawal from Iraq. Divert funds to climate programs.
• Outlaw coal fired power plants.
• Outlaw crop based biofuels production and use.
• Provide energy retro-fit for all buildings.
• Adopt new Land Use Law. Require density. Stop sprawl.
• Protect Washington trees as 'common good,' critically aiding our climate.
• Build many new nuclear power plants.
(If he were a true environmentalist, he'd have included that last one. I had to add it for him.)
Young forests absorb and sequester carbon in the soil, but as a forest matures, the process reverses itself. The answer is to cut down all the old growth forests and start clear cutting the national forests so that we can keep them you and farm them like other crops.
Posted by: blindman on August 6, 2008 12:13 AMMohammad Said sounds like he's running for president, not governor.
Posted by: blindman on August 6, 2008 12:16 AMMore like an ultra-paranoid Govt. entity overreaching and degrading the rights as citizens that were given to us by our founding fathers on a document.
You mean like this little gem sponsored by Democrat jackass Ken Jacobsen:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=8205&year=2007#history
There's your Dimocrat "party of the people".
See below:
U.S. Constitution
"Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
So tell me more about politicians degrading citizen's rights.
Posted by: NW Denizen on August 6, 2008 07:53 AMLooks like an anti-Time Eyman bill that will get nowhere. There are plenty of states without an citizens initiative process, I don't see you whining about them. Wasn't there an initiative a while back to declare crooked little Timmy Eyman a Horses Ass? I would have happily signed and voted for that.
Wrong again, Cato. The founding fathers believed that those rights were a divine right bestowed upon mankind by God. They certainly did not "give" us those rights. To imply that the rights were "given" to us means that the government can take them away.
There was, at the time, some discussion about the need for a bill of rights. Some people felt that to explicitly state those divine rights would imply that they were granted by the government.
Posted by: Obi-Wan on August 6, 2008 01:31 PMI'm glad that we have the same taste in afternoon AM radio shows and I'm laughing just thinking of the image.
Achtun!!! Vote Brian Davis!
Posted by: Don Ward on August 6, 2008 03:36 PMBy the way, great column in SW Don.
Posted by: Palouse on August 6, 2008 03:51 PMAlthough, as I'm coming to discover, I think it's against the law for people to post on the Seattle Weekly's website...
Posted by: Don Ward on August 6, 2008 03:58 PM