The P-I has a decent profile out today chewing on Dino Rossi's potential undertakings next year. Your thoughts?
Posted by Eric Earling at March 12, 2007 07:49 AM | Email ThisBut, what do they mean when they say they don't know if he will run? But, I used to do the night meeting circuit many years ago (not as a politician) and today I get a knot in my stomach whenever I have to go to one of those meetings (and I don't even have to perform most of the time, just attend).
I understand after talking to many retired mayors and elected officials that after leaving office they wonder why they were ever there in the first place.
On the article, I felt my blood boil at the comments of the two Democrat party mouthpieces. Who are they to comment on Rossi? Their comments were totally odd.
Posted by: swatter on March 12, 2007 08:17 AMI haven't seen one in a while, but I'd bet that signficant polling has been done on what the prospects would be for Rossi if he joined the race, and that it clearly points out that Rossi would win.
Posted by: johnny on March 12, 2007 09:22 AMNot to mention that the Gov is above 50% in at least one poll I could find
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seattlepolitics/archives/110321.asp
And this is probably the stupidest thing I have seen in a while.
"Lack of decision making with the viaduct will have consequences for years to come for the public trusting elected officials doing positive things with their transportation dollars," he said.
What would Rossi have done if he were governor? "I'd have made a decision," he said.
What decision? He said he didn't know. "I don't have the information" the governor has, he said.
That is is not the sort of statement people like to see. We call that CYA.
Posted by: Giffy on March 12, 2007 09:39 AMNot much as changed since then so I would guess those numbers are still pretty good.
Posted by: Giffy on March 12, 2007 09:47 AMMy concern about Rossi is primarily based on the development of his inner-circle towards and after his election.
They appeared to me to be a long list of mostly "mainstreamer" types.
While I know him from his time in the Senate, political leaders become known, in part, by the company they keep.
Reliance on Sam Reed-type Republicans (aka, Rinos) does nothing to motivate me to work for his election.
Rossi's transition team:
J. Vander Stoep, chief of staff; Dan McDonald, budget director; John Giese and Afton Swift, personnel directors; Jim Troyer, legislative affairs director; and Mary Lane, communications director. Rossi also named the following people to his transition team: Wes Uhlman, Louise Miller, Pat Herbold, John Stanton, Jim Waldo, Norward Brooks, Mike McGavick, Nina Collier, Arch Miller, Gary Ely, Ralph Ibarra, Miles Kohl, Fredi Simpson, Bruce Holmstrom, John Hennessy, John Creighton, John Connors and Jim West.
Not a single notable conservative. And no, I'm not advocating for right wing whack jobs... (Jim West was that delegate... and Rossi knew that from serving with him.)
But Louise Miller? Mike McGavick? Jim Waldo?
Why no members of the legislature? I had a bad feeling about this... much like any effort by Sam Reed to reform elections; it's bound to be worse when he's done then it was when he started.
But that's just me.
So, when or if Rossi runs, I'll be occupied elsewhere, working to get people elected that will actually remember who supported them, and why they are there.
I'm just not thrilled by electing alleged Republicans merely because that is how they happen to label themselves, when that affiliation means little to nothing to them.
After all, Sam Reed is a case in point... a man who has no more idea of what Republicanism means then he does how to run an honest election in King County. ANd my guess is that several Reed supporters are as disappointed and disillusioned about him as I am.
Just sayin'. Heh.
You may be right. But imagine if we had an honest elections system uncorrupted by Sims and King County Council Democrats? If only valid votes were counted, it is highly likely that we'd have had a Republican governor for several years now.
I think the "climate" is just fine, if only valid votes were counted without tens of thousands being remarked by political operatives, tens of thousands being cast by voters outside their precincts validated by political operatives and biased canvasing boards, and untold numbers cast and counted for the dead, double voters, non-citizens, cast by proxy, etc.?
Posted by: MJC on March 12, 2007 10:42 AMIt's hard for Democrats who are inside the protective atmosphere of the mainstream media, to understand that there is a world beyond that of the outright socialism and Marxism of WA Democrats.
It's going to be interesting.
Posted by: Jeff B. on March 12, 2007 10:56 AMSee these two posts on the SP Public Blog:
"Democrat's Cozy Relationships Largely Go Unnoticed"
It's too early to enter the race now. Even Rossi probably doesn't have that kind of stamina. I think Gregoire will continue to fumble; thus the cumulative effect of her many blunders will be even higher if/when Rossi enters the race this fall.
Posted by: Patrick on March 12, 2007 11:34 AM No question you are right. Whether Dino intended
to or not he has alienated a pretty large number
of conservatives that supported him the last time
around. This isn't to say they wont vote for Dino but
they will not help him the way the did before.
Its pretty safe to say the Mainstream Republicans
of Washington state(the official organization) have
co-opted Dino's ear. My question is who have they
ever helped win anything. There support is not
exactly a rock solid guarantee of victory.
I looked over the Peter Hart poll. I have the following observations:
1. Small sample size (506)
2. Apparently done to support Indian gaming--much higher levels of support for gaming than other polls have shown.
3. Over samples Democrats--about 12% more than Republicans while WA is more like even to D+5.
4. Peter Hart is a Democrat polling firm.
5. Another poll, from admittedly a Republican polling firm, Strategic Vision, taken about the same time and I think with a larger sample showed Rossi leading by 7%, Gregorie with a much higher disapproval rating (decidely a net negative). It also showed a much higher wrong track number for the State. It was taken shortly before the election and it did overestimate McGavick's numbers by roughly Rossi's lead. This could be either because it oversampled Republicans or because McGavick's numbers fell in the few days after the poll was taken. I think a bit of both but more likely a late trend to Cantwell. Even though Strategic Vision is a Republican pollster, it is not as much as Peter Hart. And the Strategic Vision poll shows Bush's numbers in the tank--several points worse than his national numbers at the time. I place more credibility in SV.
6. If we do what Realclearpolitics does and simply average the two polls, we come up with a Gregoire lead of 2%, hardly a great position for a Democrat incumbent with a good economy, a Democrat state,
and an unpopular Republican President around the time of the worst election defeat for the Republicans since 1974!
7. Another number that is way off is the number believing that CG won the election fairly. (53% or so). SV shows that number in the 20's.
8. But even Hart's numbers show trouble signs for Gregoire. Only 34% have decided to support her. The others are prepared to look for someone else. Oddly, Hart's numbers also show McCain beating Hillary in Washington fairly handily (but a sample size of only 250 or so).
Beyond the poll, I also disagree with your other premise that nothing has changed since November. Let's see, we have the Viaduct, the felon release, the Indian gaming deal, and profligate legislative spending.
Political trends are not straightline projections into the future. Republicans were down last November. If we project the trend out they will have -3 seats in the Senate in three more elections. I don't think that will happen. If past mid-term elections reliably established a trend, we would have had Presidents Mondale, Dukakis, and Dole.
Sorry for the wrong post, but Giffy, I wouldn't read too much into the Peter Hart poll.I think the race would be dead even right now or a small Rossi lead. With the prospect of McCain or Giuliani heading the ticket, Republicans are going to better here than they did when Bush headed the ticket. Do you think Gregoire would have done as well in 04 if Kerry wasn't winning here by 7+%?
Dino is about as conservative as you can get and plausibly be elected governor in this State. To criticize him for cozying up to "rinos" and "mainstreamers" is not helpful.
Washington does not have the political profile of Idaho or Oklahoma.
I'm pretty conservative, but I also want to win. We have to nominate canbdidates who can.
Posted by: besquared on March 12, 2007 12:07 PMIf Rossi does run, if he is anything like he was in 04, I think that he will run a positive, issues-based campaign built on his Forward Washington platform, which I think is welcome to conservatives, Dinocrats, Mainstreams, and RINOs. That kind of draw CAN have the effect of pulling out people who might not otherwise vote, and can boost the other Republican candidates. Face it...2004 was just not a good year to be a Republican running for office. Can 2008 be a turnaround year? Rossi COULD be the key.
Posted by: Notagreener on March 12, 2007 12:46 PMBut I'm not interested in electing another Dan Evans.
What's the point?
With Dino publicly surrounding himself with people like those I named above in advance of the election, Christine would have won by several thousand.
I'm very big on pragmatism in politics... but is it pragmatic for me to support someone that resembles democrats more then Republicans?
No.
I have said all along that party must mean SOMETHING. And more and more, it means less and less and struggling to become "democrat-lite" in an effort to get someone "acceptable" elected just doesn't cut it for me... making me like the idea of non-partisan elections at every level of the ticket, top to bottom, that much more attractive.
Posted by: Hinton on March 12, 2007 02:18 PMLet the Democrats run unopposed. Let the Democrat Party control the state government. Who really cares? They'll eat their young, eventually, anyway. Or at least the ones they forgot to abort.
Posted by: Rey Smith on March 12, 2007 02:34 PMGetting back to the thread topic, I do believe Dino is our best option at the statewide level...In 2004, I could detect that he had conservative principles, but that he seems to be able to make those principles acceptable to the more moderate wing of the party. Nothing wrong with that in my eyes. He has charismatic appeal to a broad range of groups, and he would be a huge upgrade over the current regime. Ronald Reagan he is not, or at least, not that we know right now. But I repeat what I said earlier...I think he (or someone like him) would be our key to turning things around statewide in 2008.
Posted by: Notagreener on March 12, 2007 02:35 PMJust considering that 53% of the voters think that she wasn't the one really elected, I think Rossi winning in '08 is almost a slam dunk (not that he should play it that way). Add in that her record in office so far smells like week old fish and Rossi could be considered by many to be a savior.
Rebel - I have to agree with you, this state has been shanghai-ed at every level by Democrat coruption. They can't make laws quick enough to tie the hands of the commoner. This will further insure their endless reign.
Dino should come out swinging:
•Talk about the early release program and the resulting dead police officers.
•Talk about the Viaduct and 520 dibacle and lack of leadership regarding transportation.
•Talk about the KC CAO private land grab without compensation.
•Lack of legislative priorities, i.e. dogs in bars...
•Endless tax paid junkets to Asia and Europe.
•Pressure KC into having an elected Head of Elections.
•Bring up Boeing HQ leaving, homelessness, tax increases, skyrocketing housing, failing schools...all during Democrat state, county and city administrations.
Leave abortion alone until you're elected and can expend some political capital.
The viaduct is one of a hundred other highly visible issues Gregoire has dropped the ball on.
He'll smoke her in any debate.
The only smart thing Gregoire has done since she's been in office to tell the nut jobs to stop trying to impeach bush from the state legislature. She has the luxery of ZERO other successes.
Posted by: Andy on March 12, 2007 03:27 PMOne poll, from the completely non-biased Seattle PI (cough-cough-cough-cough) shows Gregiore with a slight lead.
Meanwhile just about all the others show her way south of the 50% mark.
Posted by: johnny on March 12, 2007 04:57 PMDino has also positioned himself as being extremely capable of raising serious cash in a seriously short amount of time. As the article notes- he has been connecting with grassroots like crazy- I think you are going to see a lot of joe citizen types maxing out their contribution limits in the next go around.
He's also demonstrated he can bring moderates off the sidelines. Moderates who don't much care for a 9 1/2 cent emergency gas tax and everything else Gregoire has rammed in.
Posted by: Andy on March 12, 2007 06:19 PMThe only real hope for Rossi is if the Viaduct winds up hurting Gregoire so much in Seattle that she losses votes. In 04 gergoire got substantially fewer voters then Kerry and Murray in Seattle and King County mostly due to her running a really bad campaing and that's what really hurt her. My hunch though is this time around her people will do everything they can to prevent that.
Jeffro,
I would be happy if Rossi would just take a position on anything. His stance on the Viaduct is ridiculous for someone seeking office. It's easy to criticize, especially when you don't articulate a counter position. I would have made a decision is not an answer. Lets start their with Rossi saying if he supports surface, rebuild, tunnel or whatever and move on from there to other important state issues that Rossi fails to even talk about.
And can we just agree to call the Rossi-Gregoire and Gore-Bush races ties.
a. naming a transistion team running the full spectrum from the middle to the far left. (Yes, Swatter, Don McDonald is not a conservative. I'll pinch you, myself, since you obviously live in the mainstream media world where Chris Vance and Dan Evans are pro-abortion, gay rights, tax and spend, anti-property rights, anti-academic education, environmentalist wacko, illegal immigration, global socialist MODERATES making McDonald a conservative. In the real world he is the true MODERATE).
b. Continued to alienate Conservatives, FOUR of whom, having campaigned for Rossi, committed to run to replace the incredibly corrupt Vance, by needlessly, and somewhat treacherously, endorsing that disingenuous and hapless incumbent, apparently in return for vast sums of (borrowed) cash that left the WSRP in debt for the following two years for an obviously ill-advised and poorly managed lawsuit.
c. Alienated almost all remaining conservatives at the time Vance left (after a year, leaving the Party holding the bag for the remainder of his mulitmilliondollar debt) by endorsing "Mexican" (her words, not mine) and intellectually challenged (my words) Freddi Simpson as Vance's replacement. Rossi's remaining pull among Republican County leaders can be measured by the effectiveness of the Simpson Chair endorsement.
3. The Conservative Movement has a wealth of "Good Candidates with Appeal" that have the good sense not to run with philosophical Democrats running the party mechanism.
4. No top-of-the-ticket candidacy by John McCain nor Julie Rudiani can possibly help a Republican.
How long were Ford's coattails? Doles? "Moderate" GOP Presidential Candidates lose. They always have. That's no help.
Doug, you need to pinch me, too, because in my world of the mid-90s when the Rs were in limited power with a D governor, it was McDonald that tried to keep the budget in check. He got the ire of the press and the Democrats against him as a "nasty" person for not funding all the "feel good" programs.
So, I think that your definition of "conservative" and mine are way, way apart. I am surprised anyone fits your definition.
Posted by: swatter on March 13, 2007 07:04 AMI don't think the Viaduct is going to hurt CG that much. I think the felon release and the monkeyshines of the Legislature and Unions will prove to be a bigger problem.
I think the 2008 is a 50-50 proposition with a dynamic that might favor Dino a bit. At this point, I've heard a rumor of a poll taken that showed her up by 3. That would be roughly the same as averaging the two polls we know about. At this point a 3-point lead for an incumbent is a bad sign for her.
Why I think the dynamic favors Dino is that sometime early next year, he will not have to carry the albatross of GWB. We are probably going to have McCain or Giuliani at the top of the ticket. One of those guys might actually carry Washington.
I am intrigued by one finding of the Hart poll: 54% thought Democrat gains were a referendum on the Iraq War. While illogical for the voters it is plausible. Though I think the losses could be explained by Republican financial weakness and in-fighting.
If the 2008 gubernatorial election does not turn out to be referendum on Iraq or significantly impacted by GWB's unpopularity, I rate Rossi the favorite.
Posted by: besquared on March 13, 2007 01:09 PMWith Giuliani you may be right. I think he would probably turn out R leaning independents and in Washington discouraging evangelicals is not really a problem. McCain however would probably do the opposite. The man is a bit unstable and has been veering toward the right. not to mention his steadfast support of the war. All would hurt him in WA.
Much also depends on who we Dems put on the top. If its an inspiring candidate then that hurts Rossi, if its another Kerry then well its anybodies game.
But yah 3% is not a great place to be, but it s not horrible. Above 50 has generally been a good indication of reelection and Gregoire is around that. Plus she has been trending upward.
Il will be interesting to see how the felon thing plays out. The big challenge for R's will be getting it to stick to Gregoire and Dems and not just government in general. Plus 1.5 years is a lot of time for her to try and fix it gaining points.
I don't think that Gregoire is a sure thing, but right now I just don't see Rossi making the inroads he needs to make. He seems to be playing it coy and safe which only works for so long.