Safeco CEO Mike McGavick announced today he HAS decided to run for U.S. Senate against incumbent Maria Cantwell (D-WA). The P-I has this A.P. story, the Seattle Times nothing at the moment, but probably something within the next few hours. What issues do you think McGavick needs to address, and how, to unseat Cantwell? Or is this stuff always more about image than issues? Where does he need to run especially strong? And what else will be essential to a McGavick victory in '06? Go ahead and sound off.
Meanwhile, former KIRO-TV anchor and Seattle Republican Susan Hutchison told University of Washington College Republicans last week - long after McGavick's entry was strongly hinted, but before it was confirmed - that she may still get in the GOP primary too, to challenge Cantwell. The UW Daily had the story of Hutchison's appearance.
I am very concerned about what is going on in the city and state," Hutchinson said. "A (party) monopoly is a very dangerous thing when you get them controlling the state." Hutchison also mentioned she feels she is getting a lack of support from the state Republican Party. Former Safeco CEO Mike McGavick has also expressed interest in challenging for Cantwell's seat.If Hutchison and McGavick were both to challenge Cantwell, it would come down to the 2006 primary election to decide who would be the Republican candidate. UWCR member Hitha Palepu said she felt the primary would come down to the party's candidate versus the people's candidate. "McGavick is the party's candidate and (Hutchinson) is the people's candidate," Palepu said. Hutchison said she felt it would be "refreshing" to have a female Republican candidate running for the Senate in Washington.
Phil Spackman: no more teasers in the comments section here about some very big announcement coming soon from Susan, that stuff's been hollow for a while. With McGavick's announcement, it's now just about time for her to get in, or publicly bow out, and if it's the former, my ears are wide open.
UPDATE, 10/27/05: Today's Seattle Times story here: McGavick says he's "disgusted" with federal spending increases. In today's P-I article by Neil Modie, McGavick gets high marks from one D.C. political analyst, and articulates some core values: peace through strength; limited government; free enterprise; and the crucial role of the family. Yeah, I'd say those are biggies.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at October 26, 2005 06:13 PM | Email This2. Roads. Why does Alaska get a bridge to nowhere, but Cashwell comes up cashless for Washington?
3. Reform welfare reform. Get rid of the state's incentive to create single parent families and create the incentive to stop creating them.
Posted by: Andy on October 26, 2005 06:27 PM2. Roads. Why does Alaska get a bridge to nowhere, but Cashwell comes up cashless for Washington?
3. Reform welfare reform. Get rid of the state's incentive to create single parent families and create the incentive to stop creating them.
Posted by: Andy on October 26, 2005 06:28 PM Please listen very carefully I don't know
where your getting your information from
but I never said at any time an announcement
was coming.What I said was Susan will decide
when that is and only Susan knows when that
will be.
There is one other matter I would like
to clear up now as well.Some of you state
committee members and you know who you are.
Are upset with Susan because you think I'm on
her payroll.Let me state for the record that
I am not now nor have I ever been employed
by Susan to do anything.3 months ago she didn't
even know who I was.
To you State Committee members that have a
problem with me.The truth hurts I guess
everything I said in the email I sent to
all of you back on october 16th was the truth.
Its up to you whether you want to deal with
it or not.Getting upset with Susan about it
wont change that.
I would like to see the best candidate for the Republican party emerge, but I hope that a primary battle doesn't cripple our candidate for the general election. I agree that a woman Republican would be formidable for Cantwell, but it also seems like McGavick has a lot of money behind him. This could turn out to be interesting.
Posted by: Tim H. on October 26, 2005 07:00 PM
There is a reason I can't give you Susan'S
stances.In order for me to be able to talk
with her I had to agree not to reveal her
positions on anything.Believe me I wish
I could.All I can say is do any of you
really think I would back Susan the way
I am if she didn't share most of my views?
In regards to McGavick and the money he
supposedly raised.I keep hearing him say
that he has raised a lot of money.The latest
figure is 800k.My question is where is it?
According to the FEC McGavick has raised
just over 28,000 dollars and all of that
came from insurance companies.McGavick
keeps saying that over 1'000 Individuals
have contributed to his campaign.So far
there is no record of it.
By all means, let's not have anyone in D.C. who actually knows something about creating jobs and running large organizations. It'd be better to have a tree-hugging, whale-saving, commie, pinko, bleeding-heart with grooming issues who's never had a job in the private sector. It'd be even better if they spent their time (drug free time) sitting around with other pointy heads at Evergroovy. (puke)
Posted by: Danny on October 26, 2005 08:21 PMPerhaps you'd prefer another 'Mom in tennis shoes' like Patty Murray? By the way, she regularly wins the voting for the 'Least likely to be a rocket scientist' in the Senate, among the Senate staffers.
But at least Patty is being talked about! Six years of Maria Cantwell and we have nothing to show for it. How much federal monies has she brought into her state? She's passed one bill on crystal meth - worthwhile, but I expect a MUCH larger body of work in six years. At this rate, she'll be another John Kerry - 20 years in the Senate and two non-ceremonial laws passed. Oh joy.
Do you always set the bar so low?
Posted by: Larry on October 26, 2005 08:53 PMI say, "Hop in Susan, the water's fine! And please, feel free to tell us where you really stand. I'm anxious to know if I can get as excited about you as Phil is. I'm certainly not excited about McGavick. And anyone else out there who's thinking about it, come on...what are you waiting for? The GOP really needs a conservative hero right now, especially in this state."
Posted by: Republcan In Exile on October 26, 2005 09:06 PMPhil, enough is enough. You're cheerleading for a siren. If you know something we don't, but won't divulge anything, your input is worth bupkis. You aren't doing Susan or us a service by teasing us. Put up or shut up. I am not going to waste my vote on a mystery woman. If she doesn't feel safe telling us her position, then she ought to stay out of the dangerous game of politics. Cowards don't get my vote.
As for McGavick, I break wind in his direction. Any man who places himself in opposition to the right of citizens to govern by initiative has no right to ask said citizens to give him any public office higher than public sanitations manager.
If this is the best that WA GOP can do, I sure won't waste my vote on them. The last thing we need are more of what we alrady have. I'm going to write in Brian Suits.
Posted by: ERNurse on October 26, 2005 09:14 PMPosted by Grog at October 26, 2005 08:06 PM
Nope. I wouldn't vote for McGavick if he was the only candidate on the ballot. I despise Safeco Insurance Co. and would never have anything to do with the people who run that company.
Posted by: dragon on October 26, 2005 09:16 PMShe has no core values and is a Republican in Name Only.
Posted by: Norm on October 26, 2005 09:19 PMCase in Point Cantwell / slade!
So get out and vote for change Nov 8th. Help get this county's election machinery dismantled and fixed!
Nothing will change until that happens!
Posted by: GS on October 26, 2005 09:51 PM
Look I will say this again another way
Most people know I am a conservative
If I said I would back someone who shares
most of my views.What does that tell you?
Norm Judging someone on the basis of one
interview is foolish.Susan is no more a rhino
than I am.
McGavick is opposed to I-912
How much of the 14.7 cent Federal gas tax have these Senators brought back?
It has been reported that states, on average, get about 92% of the Federal gas tax back. Over the 16 year 9.5 cent state gas tax life, the feds would collect about 8.4 billion, of which we might expect to see 7.8 billion returned.
Are our current Senators delivering? Is it coming back to roads and transportation - or meaningless pork?
Boston's big dig received Billions of federal dollars. So far, the viaduct (Seattle's big dig) has received a promise of 200 Million. As much as I don't really care for the Mass. senators, they do know how to extract money for their state.
I don't yet know much about McGavick, but I do know I'm not really impressed with what we have now.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on October 26, 2005 10:47 PMOr is it just more of the usual hand-wringing, crocodile tears and lip service?
Posted by: TB on October 27, 2005 12:10 AMAfter all, if profitability had not been restored, everyone in the company would have become unemployed. I think most people in the room had a grudging respect for him, because he could have sent someone from HR to perform the same task.
It turned out that I found another position within the company, so I had a chance to witness his leadership skills.
1) He was forthright and open. He held regular company-wide employee meetings.
2) He was smart, and quick on his feet.
3) He was pragmatic in the sense that he pursued a corporate strategy of targeting emerging markets such as minority and inner city businesses. He abandoned lines of business that were oversaturated and unprofitable.
4) He was positive and upbeat, and charismatic.
5) He addressed employee concerns with the same degree of attention I would hope to see in a Senator. He would personally answer e-mails from 10,000 employees, and meet with employees who came to him with problems.
6) He surrounded himself with terrific managers. He retained people who were proven performers.
7) He was decisive after evaluating all aspects of a problem.
I have not worked at Safeco for several years. I have no personal stake in Mr. McGavick's candidacy. I have not studied his ideological positions, so I may or may not agree with him on the issues. However, I do recommend him as a leader.
Posted by: Tim B. on October 27, 2005 01:50 AMCorporate shill=someone who's had a real job, as opposed to working in a daycare.
Murray is an embarassment to the state of Washington.
Posted by: South County on October 27, 2005 05:19 AMAlso, you can expect a huge MSM blitz for Cant-do-well in the next year. I called it and watched it in '04 for Dimwit Patty. Murray hid for five years and the media made her look like a hero during her campaign. The same is already happening for our other invisible senator. The trouble is that a majority of the idiots in this state would vote for her even if she had died last year.
Posted by: Saltherring on October 27, 2005 05:25 AMIronically, Cantwell isn't too far off that description, either. A corporate hack who made millions in the tech bubble and when it went bust the "little people" were the ones who got hurt, not fat-cat CEOs who got a ticket to the US Senate as a parachute. But that doesn't matter, Cantwell gets a pass for being a 'Rat.
My guess at this point is that if McGavick runs a decent campaign, he may only get beat by 8-10 points. If he is a lousy campaigner, and Cantwell runs a good one (something that is likely), it could be a 15-20 point blowout. It gives me no pleasure to size it up that way, but it's the way it may play out. Somehow, tapping a corporate CEO as the Republican candidate does not seem like a good selling point in a bluer-blue state like WA.
Posted by: Interested Observer on October 27, 2005 06:42 AM"What's McGavick's position on I-912?
Posted by Ivan at October 26, 2005 10:32 PM
Ivan
McGavick is opposed to I-912
Posted by phil spackman at October 26, 2005 10:40 PM"
Posted by: West Seattle Resident on October 27, 2005 07:16 AM
Do you know how to read? Look at what I said.
McGavick opposes I-912.That means he is
against it.Before using my name that way
please read what I said.
Just what did you expect Susan to do?
She was the only republican on the committee.
Do you really think that a room full of
liberals were going to go along with anything
she said.
Sorry for the double posting above!
Posted by: West Seattle Resident on October 27, 2005 07:36 AMThat is the lamest excuse to be a Senator I have ever heard.
Posted by: baffles on October 27, 2005 07:41 AMPhil S...Susan may have been the only Republican on the committee, but I expected her to do something, anything to uphold the rights of the citizens of Washington and legal voters and seperate herself from that pack of "yes" men and liberals. She choose not to...not one peep, not one word, nada. Therefore giving us to believe she is in complete agreement with this sham review. Although the blue ribbon panel was a great high visability opportunity to show us what she is made of, Susan was underwhelming. Elections integrity is a major agenda item to most local voters, but she came accross as a spineless brown-noser instead of a strong defender the people. Rather like a blond Cantwell, I'm not impressed so far.
Posted by: dl on October 27, 2005 08:11 AMAnd McGavick is not getting my vote either. He is not only against I-912, he is against the whole initiative process. If he does not support the right of the people to govern, he is not fit to hold elected office.
I have no confidence at all in the ability of WA GOP to field a candidate who will defend and support the Constitution and the will of the people.
What would I like to see? I'd like to see Rossi run for senate. Washington as a state is a hopeless case. Liberals are far too deeply entrenched for the current castrated RINO WA GOP to extricate. No improvement in leadership quality has materialized thus far. Rossi would be more useful and more successful at the federal level. I wish he'd run. He's the only WA Republican who would get my vote at this time.
Posted by: ERNurse on October 27, 2005 09:16 AMWhat insurance company do people LOVE? None. They all bite. I can tell you personally that Uniguard is much more malevolent and dangerous than Safeco.
There is no good insurance company. The question is - what kind of leader was McGavick at Safeco?
Posted by: Larry on October 27, 2005 09:45 AMI want representatives that can say "NO", as in:
Special interest: "senator, we have a problem, what can government do about it."
Senator: "Nothing, fixing that problem is not government's responsibility."
What insurance company do people LOVE? None. They all bite. I can tell you personally that Uniguard is much more malevolent and dangerous than Safeco.
There is no good insurance company. The question is - what kind of leader was McGavick at Safeco?
Posted by Larry at October 27, 2005 09:45 AM
Larry,
Is it unreasonable to assume that Mr. McGavick had a say in how Safeco Insurance Company was run? Are not their policies of operation a reflection of the CEO, at least in some way? Would you vote for a candidate based on his experience and background? If so, why would you vote for someone who ran a corporation that, by your own admission, is "malevolent and dangerous." Since "Uniguard is much more malevolent and dangerous than Safeco" does that make Safeco a better company? Does that imply that McGavick is less a party to the malevolence and evil that is the insurance industry? I did not miss the point. Because he was the CEO of Safeco is precisely why I would not vote for him if he was the only candidate on the ballot. We don't need more of those kind of people in office.
You have an issue that the SC considers a company made up of people for people is considered an entity with rights - which protect the people that own it like union retirement plans. Do you also have an issue with the OR SC saying that live sex in public is just a first amendment right of free expression?
Posted by: fred on October 27, 2005 10:39 AMSome of the issues that might serve such a purpose could be: King County election reform (where malfeasance effectively disenfrancises many voters in the rest of the state); property rights protection/eminent domain restrictions; and education reform. In each of these cases it is the Democrats that will have a hard time moving to the center.
Others may have better ideas, particularly if they have a list of targeted State Senate seats and candidates, and a list of issues that will be most persuasive in those races. I look forward to seeing the strategy unfold.
Posted by: HT on October 27, 2005 10:58 AMMy comment comparing Uniguard to Safeco was in response to an earlier post. I don't regard Safeco as malevolent nor dangerous - I regard them as my home & auto insurance company, and a necessary evil. All insurance companies suck - and Safeco sucks much less. So they must be doing something A LOT better than other companies in their industry - which indicates to me that McGavick is probably a GOOD leader.
I'd say the same thing if it were the CEO of a soft-drink company. I think Pepsi and Coke are dangerous to young kids. But that wouldn't preclude me from voting for a good leader.
Posted by: Larry on October 27, 2005 11:08 AMAlso, to follow up a bit on one of your other comments, your characterization of Walmart is largely incorrect. Most of the merchandise they offer is name-brand (Black and Decker, Sanyo, Panasonic, Remington, just to name a few), and if something comes from China that's a disadvantage that all retailers selling that product face equally. At least Walmart beats its suppliers down on the price so that as much of our money stays in the hands of U.S. consumers as possible.
Posted by: HT on October 27, 2005 11:36 AM
Maybe I should type in morse code about being facetious over those examples of "evil" corporations. I thought the Herbie the love bug reference was enough of a give away. But maybe I should type it out.
... .- .-. -.-. .- ... -- !!!!
Maybe I just missed the memo about when insurance companies began being lumped in with the lot.
Posted by: Reporterward on October 27, 2005 12:11 PM I know I can convince you and everyone else.
Yes I can say with straight face that Susan
Shares most of my views because I have met
with her and know where she stands on the
issues.
That statement about the fog was uncalled
for.I know Susan isn't like that because
I know the real Susan.Once again you are
basing your judgement on one interview.
I will say it one more time I am a conservative
through and through.If Susan didn't share
most of my views I wouldn't be backing her the
way I am.
I don't hear anyone contending that Susan is not a conservative. Possessing conservative opinions and values is one thing, stating those values in direct opposition to a room full of liberals is quite another. I don't believe, as demonstrated by her service on the election audit panel, that Susan has the guts to stand up to the raging, irrational screwball leftists who now control the Democrat Party. The only WA state politician I've seen with that ability is Dino Rossi.
Posted by: Saltherring on October 27, 2005 12:34 PMNo thanks. Remember his company will drop you if you make a claim.
Posted by: JRenton on October 27, 2005 01:12 PMI’ve had the privilege to meet him on three different occasions, and hear him speak twice. He’s an excellent communicator, and as an earlier comment indicated: he’s quick on his feet. Beyond that, as the PI article chronicles, McGavick is a principled man. He cites Ronald Reagan as his strongest influence, and we know he must also share a common philosophy with Slade.
Some have commented that McGavick’s position at Safeco is a detriment to his campaign. Anyone who can bring an insurance company back from the brink of disaster has skills.
Do you know what McGavick is putting on the line in the name of making a difference for the citizens of this state?
Here’s a man who probably makes millions of dollars a year. He lives in a big house in the ‘burbs, drives a sweet car, and has a nice family life (I know he’s got a kid who plays soccer). He’s willing to put all of that on hold to serve us in the U.S. Senate, arguably one of the biggest rat races in American politics. Anyone who has the courage, resolve, and backbone that it takes to even run a Senate campaign (in Washington no less) let alone serve honorably in the U.S. Senate, has my vote.
Rossi didn’t want to put his family through another campaign right away. Can you imagine what it’s like for the candidate’s family?
Of course, then there’s Patty and Maria, the two disheveled cowards, unprincipled, and spineless ‘Rats who make the Senate what it is today. When McGavick hits the campaign trail, Washington politics will heat up exponentially higher than our last Governor’s race.
I don’t claim to speak for McGavick. He’ll do that well enough for himself after he kicks off. Until that time, his detractors will be looking for anything and everything with which to discredit him.
On that point, he should be questioning why our state is so anti-family and especially anti-father. At the federal level, he should question why the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) has been allowed to become an employment program for gender feminists and has been allowed to turn state and local governments and police forces into anti-man and anti-father gestapo forces.
Specific to Cantwell, he should ask how it is that an unmarried woman with now children could have any understanding of the challenges of families in the State of Washington.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on October 27, 2005 03:06 PMPhil, this one is so obvious. You can't tell us what Susan's position is on anything, but we're supposed to just trust you.
Sounds a lot like Harriet Miers/George W. Bush to me.
Posted by: Hoplophile on October 27, 2005 03:35 PMPhil, this one is so obvious. You can't tell us what Susan's position is on anything, but we're supposed to just trust you.
Sounds a lot like Harriet Miers/George W. Bush to me.
Posted by: Hoplophile on October 27, 2005 03:35 PMPhil, this one is so obvious. You can't tell us what Susan's position is on anything, but we're supposed to just trust you.
Sounds a lot like Harriet Miers/George W. Bush to me.
Posted by: Hoplophile on October 27, 2005 03:35 PM That's absurd to even compare Susan to Harriet
Miers.If I could tell all of you her positions
I sure would.To think I would put my reputation
on the line by making it all up is just plain
crazy.One more time I am a conservative through
and through.Do you really think I would back
Susan this much if she didn't share most of
my views?
"Washington state can't afford another vote for the Bush/Cheney/Rove agenda. America is already run by oil and gas men who had millions while cutting jobs. The last person we need representing us is an insurance company lobbyist, who made millions by cutting jobs.
"So I'm glad that Mike McGavick got his marching orders from the Rove team before any more indictments come down against the Bush and GOP leadership. It's ironic that McGavick talked today about the need for a different kind of leadership as he goes forward as part of the scandal-rocked GOP team.
"It's clear that McGavick will be busy raising money from his buddies in the insurance industry, working with old cronies in the other Washington, paying attention to his duties as a highly-paid CEO and worrying about primary opposition.
"The Republicans seem to have an interesting primary now. Well-known TV journalist Susan Hutchison v. the hand picked Bush/Rove candidate, insurance industry lobbyist. Either way, Senator Cantwell wins.
"Sen. Maria Cantwell represents leadership for Washington State. She took on the special interests in 2000 and won, and has spent the last five years fighting to protect the environment, championing our state's industries, cutting taxes and protecting ratepayers from Enron's price-gouging."
"Washington state can't afford another vote for the Bush/Cheney/Rove agenda. America is already run by oil and gas men who had millions while cutting jobs. The last person we need representing us is an insurance company lobbyist, who made millions by cutting jobs.
"So I'm glad that Mike McGavick got his marching orders from the Rove team before any more indictments come down against the Bush and GOP leadership. It's ironic that McGavick talked today about the need for a different kind of leadership as he goes forward as part of the scandal-rocked GOP team.
"It's clear that McGavick will be busy raising money from his buddies in the insurance industry, working with old cronies in the other Washington, paying attention to his duties as a highly-paid CEO and worrying about primary opposition.
"The Republicans seem to have an interesting primary now. Well-known TV journalist Susan Hutchison v. the hand picked Bush/Rove candidate, insurance industry lobbyist. Either way, Senator Cantwell wins.
"Sen. Maria Cantwell represents leadership for Washington State. She took on the special interests in 2000 and won, and has spent the last five years fighting to protect the environment, championing our state's industries, cutting taxes and protecting ratepayers from Enron's price-gouging."
"Washington state can't afford another vote for the Bush/Cheney/Rove agenda. America is already run by oil and gas men who had millions while cutting jobs. The last person we need representing us is an insurance company lobbyist, who made millions by cutting jobs.
"So I'm glad that Mike McGavick got his marching orders from the Rove team before any more indictments come down against the Bush and GOP leadership. It's ironic that McGavick talked today about the need for a different kind of leadership as he goes forward as part of the scandal-rocked GOP team.
"It's clear that McGavick will be busy raising money from his buddies in the insurance industry, working with old cronies in the other Washington, paying attention to his duties as a highly-paid CEO and worrying about primary opposition.
"The Republicans seem to have an interesting primary now. Well-known TV journalist Susan Hutchison v. the hand picked Bush/Rove candidate, insurance industry lobbyist. Either way, Senator Cantwell wins.
"Sen. Maria Cantwell represents leadership for Washington State. She took on the special interests in 2000 and won, and has spent the last five years fighting to protect the environment, championing our state's industries, cutting taxes and protecting ratepayers from Enron's price-gouging."
"Washington state can't afford another vote for the Bush/Cheney/Rove agenda. America is already run by oil and gas men who had millions while cutting jobs. The last person we need representing us is an insurance company lobbyist, who made millions by cutting jobs.
"So I'm glad that Mike McGavick got his marching orders from the Rove team before any more indictments come down against the Bush and GOP leadership. It's ironic that McGavick talked today about the need for a different kind of leadership as he goes forward as part of the scandal-rocked GOP team.
"It's clear that McGavick will be busy raising money from his buddies in the insurance industry, working with old cronies in the other Washington, paying attention to his duties as a highly-paid CEO and worrying about primary opposition.
"The Republicans seem to have an interesting primary now. Well-known TV journalist Susan Hutchison v. the hand picked Bush/Rove candidate, insurance industry lobbyist. Either way, Senator Cantwell wins.
"Sen. Maria Cantwell represents leadership for Washington State. She took on the special interests in 2000 and won, and has spent the last five years fighting to protect the environment, championing our state's industries, cutting taxes and protecting ratepayers from Enron's price-gouging."
"Washington state can't afford another vote for the Bush/Cheney/Rove agenda. America is already run by oil and gas men who had millions while cutting jobs. The last person we need representing us is an insurance company lobbyist, who made millions by cutting jobs.
"So I'm glad that Mike McGavick got his marching orders from the Rove team before any more indictments come down against the Bush and GOP leadership. It's ironic that McGavick talked today about the need for a different kind of leadership as he goes forward as part of the scandal-rocked GOP team.
"It's clear that McGavick will be busy raising money from his buddies in the insurance industry, working with old cronies in the other Washington, paying attention to his duties as a highly-paid CEO and worrying about primary opposition.
"The Republicans seem to have an interesting primary now. Well-known TV journalist Susan Hutchison v. the hand picked Bush/Rove candidate, insurance industry lobbyist. Either way, Senator Cantwell wins.
"Sen. Maria Cantwell represents leadership for Washington State. She took on the special interests in 2000 and won, and has spent the last five years fighting to protect the environment, championing our state's industries, cutting taxes and protecting ratepayers from Enron's price-gouging."
His campaign appears to be more about his own vanity and ambition than about leading the nation or the state. He doesn't appear to really stand for anything or represent much beyond himself.
Would Ronald Reagan refuse to answer the I-912 question and call it a "private" decision?
This guy looks like a joke.
Posted by: thor on October 27, 2005 07:03 PMWhen energy companies screw consumers- the left will blame Bush, but remember they are doing it on Cantwell and Paticakes' watch. Both of these bozos like to come in after the fact and claim they put an end to the evil, when in fact the haven't done squat to prevent it.
Posted by: Andy on October 27, 2005 07:14 PMTruth be told though- I'm interested to see how he comes out on these issues.
As a temperature reading- I wouldn't go wave signs for him on a rainy afternoon next year.
Posted by: Andy on October 27, 2005 07:19 PM Lets take a step back here,first of all
I made the point about why I would back
Susan.What I was trying to say was that
I wouldn't back some unless we shared the
same views.Thats exactly what I'm doing.
While its true I have put a lot on the
line backing Susan. I really don't care
what anyone thinks about that.If I had to
do it over again I would the same thing
Because I know backing Susan Hutchison
is the right thing to do.
Its not a good idea to resort to name
calling when you don't like someone.
You don't know Susan the way I do.
She has always been a winner and come
November 2007 she will be again.
I meant 2006 sorry about that.
Posted by: phil spackman on October 27, 2005 09:45 PMEnough already with the broken record. I'll ask you the direct question you have avoided answering in each of your repetitious posts: Why didn't Susan go public with any disagreements she had with Sim's hand picked bobbleheads on the elections audit team? By not doing so, she lost credibility with hard-nosed conservatives who refuse to vote for a Republican Senate candidate who can't stand up to the Seattle-based leftist machine. She let every honest person in Washington state down by rubber-stamping that milktoast "audit". Sorry, Phil, I'm sure Susan's a wonderful person and a great neighbor, but she won't get my vote.
Posted by: Saltherring on October 28, 2005 05:40 AMPhil...I find myself often in agreement with some of your views on Republican Party politics. This time.....no. Susan Hutchison is a very likable person and presents herself very well. But that isn't enough. We have enough lilly-livered conservatives who lack the courage to stand up when we need them to.
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 28, 2005 06:09 AMwhat is the deal with those horrendously formatted posts? Are you using some sort of voice recognition software? If you want to be taken seriously, get some word processing software and spellcheck.
Tell Susan to quit p-ssing around. She needs to differentiate herself from McGavick with the populist grass roots or she's going to be buried in a deluge of Bellevue mafia propaganda before she even gets out of the gate. Two words: Wesley Clark.
Tell her to shut up about the gender thing as well.. it gives a lot of credibility to the suspicions many already have that she is a shallow, superficial broadcast boob. The only people who care that she is a woman are the eastside/Seattle party eunuchs who keep getting their balls handed to them come November because they give us candidates like David Irons.
Posted by: Jim on October 28, 2005 08:29 AMI know the argument that it costs more to make biodiesal (from a crop) than you can sell for on the free market. Is this true when the price hits $5/gallon or better yet when the oil companies plan their next disaster price hike?
We see a $2M prize for a robot race through the desert, but jack in support of alternative fuels. I hand it to the lefties at by Evergreen for taking the lead on this.
Posted by: Andy on October 28, 2005 08:46 AMPhil, I am deeply intrigued... you said in an earlier post that Susan reflects most of your views. Which ones does she not reflect?
In case you haven't noticed, Phil, we true conservatives are beginning to flex our majority muscle. We got Miers pulled from consideration. And if you think that we are willing to cast our precious votes on yet another weak-kneed moderate and hope for the best, I respectfully submit that you have missed the bus.
In her capitulation to the liberals, Susan has proven herself unfit for the challenge of senatorial representation. She is no longer relevant. She had months to define herself, and she instead chose to hide. She threw away her chance, Phil, and the increasingly angry conservative majority has moved on. Your paradigm is now obsolete. Join us or get out of the way.
I, and hundreds of thousands like me in this state, have this to say: if the WA GOP is unable to field a true conservative rather than the rubbish they have put on our plate so far, they will find November to be a very, very cold month indeed.
Posted by: ERNurse on October 30, 2005 12:38 AM