November 08, 2008
... And He's Taken The Lead!
Mike Hope, for the first time in the 44th LD race, is in the lead over Liz Loomis.
As Eric noted previously, Mike's been gaining. Many counted him out. But the late ballots have trended heavily his way, and he's now in front by 118 votes (with 92 write-ins), and 0.18 percentage points. According to the Secretary of State's web site, Snohomish County estimates 15,000 ballots remain.
The other close race up north of King County is Norma Smith versus Tim Knue. Smith took the lead on Friday, and maintains it today.
Posted by pudge at November 08, 2008
04:21 PM | Email This
1. VOLUNTEERS contact me to help! Were not going to let them steal this one. Dunshee and Hobbs are already out trying to help Liz win
Blair
Blairanderson98271@comcast.net
4255839500
2. Wow, I never thought I'd see this happen. Amazing that incumbency and a fairly moderate record couldn't save Dave Schmidt in 2006 yet two-time loser Mike Hope is going to sneak in and take this.
3.
I was at the 47th and 31st Republican PCO meeting in Auburn last night and I heard that we Republicans actually held on to and gained in local seats.
After the initial shock of the national elections, I'm starting to see this more as a last gasp of the Democrats who basically ran a top down, media heavy campaign with little grassroots networking.
Meanwhile, the Republican base is strong and growing. Republicans took over the state senate in Oklahoma.
4. Wasn't Steve Hobbs a two time loser as well before winning? Also, Liz has never won a contested race. Imagine that.
5. Umm...Mike Hope probably doorbelled more homes this election that Dave Schmidt did in his entire career.
6. Personally I like Steve a lot and I would never hold losing an election against someone--at least he made an effort and got there. But then again he is working against Mike so he can expect that favor returned in 2 years from Rep Hope
7. Personally I like Steve a lot and I would never hold losing an election against someone--at least he made an effort and got there. But then again he is working against Mike so he can expect that favor returned in 2 years from Rep Hope and myself
8. Mike Hope has had more electoral success than the armchair quarterbacks reading this board.
9. Actually Dave Schmidt came out with us one day he is a doorbell king. Now Liz on the other hand, we prob doorbelled more homes in one week than she did her entire campaign.
10. TMW:
Wow. "Sneak in"? How is winning a majority of the vote "sneaking in"?
And "two-time loser"? Loomis lost to Kirk Pearson in the 39th in 2000, and was appointed to the lesiglature (and as noted, has never won a contested election). If the current trends hold, she will also be a "two-time loser."
Indeed, it is BECAUSE Mike is a "two-time loser" that he was able to do this: he ran very good campaigns against Hans Dunshee, such that he had more name recognition than the incumbent in the 44th coming into this race.
11. Actually maybe we did "sneak" in. After wasting nearly half a million dollars trying to throw their weakest candidate a life preserver, nobody thought we could do it.500,000 dollars, illegal last minute donations from the Master Builders Assn and what do they have to show for it?
.
12. Well... excellent. A little bit of good news - hopefully the lead grows.
13. Mike is just a class act all around. He busted his tail, and ran a very positive, upbeat, and focused campaign.
You learn by doing. He's learned and applied it this time around, no question.
--j
14. I wonder, and I am dead serious, because there are many uninformed voters out there, who voted for Mike based on his name HOPE. Think about this...how many times did you hear the word HOPE or see the word HOPE in the last 2 years? That could be enough to swing the election to Mike. Now I voted for him, but I couldn't help but think of his name as HOPE in this Presidential Election
15. Pudge, I'd say he did sneak in. It isn't meant to be a derogatory term, it simply means he was able to win against the odds. Nor is mentioning his two previous losses, as it just adds to the unlikelihood of this victory. I preferred him to Dunshee the previous two times as well as this time against Loomis, but I also preferred Steve Hobbs in 2006 along with his status as a two-time loser. All I'm getting at is sometimes we see pleasant surprises at the ballot box.
16. Why all the sturm and drang about Loomis-Hope? I'm an independent, and I voted Loomis because I'd rather have someone in the majority who I agreed with (on most things) than someone in the minority that I agreed with (on most things).
Both ran as fiscal conservatives. Neither really addressed civil liberties, though both are gun-friendly. She is more socially progressive (which I liked) and that's what tipped my vote to her.
In fact, the first party that gets that combination (fiscal conservative/social progressive) into their thick skulls will never be out of office.
Just curious,
Thomas
17. Thomas: Loomis RAN as a fiscal conservative, but she didn't ACT as one in the legislature, racking up one of the most expensive voting records in the House during her short time.
Plus, if you really believe in fiscal conservatism, your logic is counterintuitive: she would do NOTHING to stem the tide of taxing or spending by the Democrats, going along with all their big taxing and spending bills in the end.
TMW: maybe I took what you said the wrong way, but I still disagree. I think he ran a great campaign and flat-out won (assuming the trends hold up and he does, in fact, win). I see no beating the odds and no surprise here. Seems like what should be happening, to me. :-)
18. Today, it shows Norma Smith down 16 votes with 25 write-ins.
19. swatter, you're looking at Snohomish County. Her district, the 10th, crosses three counties. Smith is
up by 450.
20. Good. I supported her (i.e. time and talent) run for Larsen's spot four years ago. She did good, too, but may have been too much of a newbie. Still, she did good.