Caucus 2008

It was my first time caucusing, so I didn't know what to expect. Overall, things went smoothly. Here's a play by play:

• Showed up at the nick of time (1:30 pm), though they were fairly lenient about when people could sign in (5-10 minutes even after that deadline).
• They put 4 precincts in this little middle school library. It was hard to hear each precinct head describe the rules as they talked over each other.
  
• There were 120 voters in our precinct, and 9 local delegates. Originally that came out to 6-2-1 Obama, Clinton, and undecided.
• Then, people could change their votes - a few did, most didn't.
  
• We then split up into our representative groups (Obama supporters, Clinton supporters, undecided supporters) and hung around for a bit.
• Then, it was announced that it was 7-2 Obama, Clinton. Apparently, enough undecideds voters got off the fence.
• We then elected people from our group to go to the county convention. 7 primary and 7 alternate delegates. We had a couple more than 7 primary, so people just volunteered to be alternates instead.
• Then, we split.

It took about an hour overall once things got rolling. Kind of a neat way of doing it, given the community nature and the "we elect our delegates" part of it.

Stop The Political Telemarketing!

This weekend, my phone has been ringing off the hook. You'd think I was featured on some TV show, and people are calling to comment on the smashing shirt that I wore or something. No. Instead, people who are paid by political campaigns to call registered voters have been calling me, urging me to vote for their candidate.

Now, the interruptions are bad enough, but what's worse is half of these calls are recordings. They're not even willing to sit a real human on the other end of the line, but instead want me to listen to a computer spouting a recorded message of support from a local public figure.

Next time someone calls, I'm going to inform them that I am seriously considering voting against the candidate who they are trying to get me to vote for. I know, I know, "you have to play the game" politically, and if you don't make these calls and your competition does, then what?

I'll tell you what: how about your platform & promises be enough to carry you through an election, instead of relying on last-minute "please please vote for me!" calls?

And the reward for this election season being over next Tuesday? The run-up to the 2008 elections, of course, and the never-ending rhetoric, ads, and mud-slinging that will accompany them. I feel like I'm already done with those elections, and they're still a year away.

Seattle Voting Guide: The Name Game

OK, so it's time to elect some more people to office. In the past, we've done a picture-only analysis and a web site analysis. This time, we'll go for names. That's right: word association, word roots, or other gut reactions to people's names. Hey, from a guy who gets his last name mispronounced most of the time, I can relate.

King County Prosecuting Attorney
Bill Sherman. Hmm...Sherman. Hey, wasn't that some sort of general guy? Wow, that's pretty cool. Satterberg? Sorry, doesn't ring a bell.

Name Game vote: Bill Sherman

King County Assessor
What? Noble vs. Nobles? That's way too close! Can't...compute...difference.

Name Game vote: write-in "Noble(s)"

King County Council District #6
Pope is very holy. But Hague sounds like Hogue, the winery. Redemption vs. sin. Well, that's easy.

Name Game vote: Jane Hague

King County Council District #8
Constantine. Hey, that sounds like the namesake of Constantinople (no, not Istanbul). Cool. Potter, while reminiscent of the fantasy series' hero, doesn't do it for me. Wizardry teens vs. a friggin historical anchor and capital of three empires? Try to Patronus that one.

Name Game vote: Dow Constantine

Port Commissioner Position #2
Tarleton is kinda wacky, while Edwards is boring. Wow, this is a tough one. Neither really ring a bell... OK, Wikipedia for the tie-breaker. Whoa, check out that depiction of Banastre Tarleton! What a great headpiece!

Name Game vote: Gael Tarleton

Port Commissioner Position #5
Fisken? That sounds kind of imposing and sly, doesn't it? Like, "He's going to fisken you, watch out." Bryant sounds pretty safe. Plus, they make heating and cooling systems. Who doesn't want a cozy home, after all?

Name Game vote: Bill Bryant

Seattle City Council Position #1
Godden. That sounds quite Supreme Being doesn't it? But Szwaja! Whoa, look at that consonant-to-vowel ratio!

Name Game vote: Joe Szwaja

Seattle City Council Position #3
Harrell. Boring. Velázquez. Exotic!

Name Game vote: Venus Velázquez

Seattle City Council Position #7
Della. Hey, isn't that an actor? Cool. But Burgess, it means elected official! He's practically made for the job!

Name Game vote: Tim Burgess

Seattle City Council Position #9
Clark. Like Clark Howard, consumer advocate! Fenton? As in, the funeral home? No thanks.

Name Game vote: Sally Clark


Remember: vote early, vote often!

Scupltures Of Naked People Are Not The Best Political Platform

Meet Judy Fenton. Judy is running for a seat on the Seattle City Council. OK, Judy, welcome to the race!

But wait, let's see what Judy stands for. From her site:

PUBLIC ART: Parents and teachers work hard to instill safe boundaries for our children, the precious next generation. Public art must not blur and confuse those boundaries!

Hmm...what does that mean? A Seattle Weekly article sheds some light:

Specifically, Fenton is concerned about the fountain at the base of the Olympic Sculpture Park that depicts a man and a boy standing naked facing each other. "We spend a lot of heartfelt time and effort teaching our children boundaries and guidelines, telling them if somebody touches us in ways that aren't appropriate what they should do," Fenton explains. "If somebody sees that statue, it will undo that and confuse them."

...

Ok, Judy, seriously? A statue of a naked man and naked boy facing each other, arms outstretched, is one of the issues you're basing your entire campaign on (and, presumably, one you think is a cornerstone issue that must be resolved in this city)? Come on. Seriously?

Ha! I get it - it's a joke, right? You really meant that you wanted to give more funding to the arts, including naked statue art. Right?

Oh crap, you're serious?

...

OK, then, I can only do one thing. I'm declaring my position on artwork for Seattle. From now on, I believe that all public art depictions of one Judy Fenton of Seattle, WA be barred from display in any public place.

The reason? You see, it scares the hootenanny out of me that someone believes these statues are a problem, and believes it is so much an issue as to run a political campaign on it. And, you see, that confuses me and undoes all the heartfelt time and effort that public art has strived to instill in me. Sorry, Judy - I just can't have that. You know, just like children can't bear to look at statues of naked people.

Smoke And Mirrors In Solving Global Warming

So we've all seen An Inconvenient Truth and heard the dire predictions of our climatological future. What do our leaders propose as a solution? Smoke and mirrors. Literally.

Yep, our submission to the UN report for a worldwide climate plan is to reflect some of the sun's energy back into space, through the use of giant mirrors or reflective particles shot into the atmosphere.

Would it work? Maybe. But why the heck are we resorting to lofty projects like these (literally), when we waste so much power we produce through dirty means? Let's reduce the emissions from those coal plants, for one. Let's invest more in cleaner energy production and mass transit, for another. And let's do it fast.

Funding, you say? I know where $5-$10 billion a month is going that we could put to better use...

Flip-Flopper, Part Deux

In the 2004 election, it was all about how Kerry supposedly was a flip-flopper, and wasn't a reliable, "stay the course" kind of decision maker. Putting aside where that mantra has led us, looks like one potential political candidate for 2008 has had his share of flip-flops.

I'm all about people changing their minds, provided with more information about a subject. But when it comes to some pretty key policy issues (energy, torture, taxes) that we've had enough information about for a while, these types of changes smell less like "more information" flip-flops and more like "cave to the Administration" flip-flops.

"The Stranger"'s Terrible Election Endorsement

As most people know, next Tuesday is mid-term election day. It's a journalistic tradition for newspapers to endorse candidates and propositions on the ballot. One of Seattle's major free weeklies, The Stranger, has done just that. And, while most of their endorsements are fine by my book, one really stands out as, well, just plain bad.

Here's the background: the 43rd district in Washington State includes some of the more liberal portions of Seattle, which itself is a fairly liberal city. For a while now, Ed Murray has been one of the Democratic representatives to the state House for the 43rd. For 2006, a seat opened up in the state Senate, and Ed Murray decided to run for the seat (which he'll most likely win). This means Murray is vacating a House seat, which will almost surely go to a Democratic candidate.

Our primary last September pitted 6 Democratic candidates against each other. The result was Jamie Pedersen edging out Jim Street and 4 others for the nomination, with 23% of the vote. You could argue that 77% of the Democratic voters were disappointed, but you can also probably bet that most of those voters will vote Pedersen in.

Enter The Stranger. From their election endorsements:

Admittedly, there is one Republican we just can't resist endorsing. In the 43rd District race our Democratic candidate of choice, Stephanie Pure, was eliminated in the primary. As a consequence, the state legislature will once again lack a voice for today's youth. Which is why we're issuing a rare Republican endorsement: vote for Hugh Foskett, the Republican running against Jamie Pedersen for this open seat in the Washington State House of Representatives. Foskett is a sophomore at the University of Washington and, as we've seen over the last few weeks, Foskett is quite literally in touch with today's young people.

Wait, Stranger, you're endorsing a Republican college student? For one of the most liberal districts in Seattle?

I don't want to marginalize Foskett, but he's a sophomore math major at UW. He doesn't appear to have any background in public service (at least, his web site and voter pamphlet statement don't seem to indicate any). He's running on two issues (education, environment) with fairly generic positions. And, for the sake of argument, if he's elected, will he just drop his studies when Olympia is in session each year?

Pedersen is a lawyer, active in many local organizations, and has worked for marriage equality and GLBT issues. He's not my ideal choice, as I believe he's less progressive on issues outside of the GLBT space, but he's the best on the ballot in my opinion.

Since The Stranger's pick during the primary, Stephanie Pure, didn't get nominated, why not recommend that people write her in? Isn't that the best way to cast one's vote towards the person who one feels is best qualified?

I'm Fed Up With Political Ads

The November elections are but days away, and while I know how I'm going to vote, I also know I'll be entering the voting booth with tense shoulders, a headache, and a sneer on my face. The reason? Political ads. They're everywhere.

They show up in my mailbox, as printed multi-color cardstock ads. They appear as pre-recorded messages on my answering machine, from people who I think I'm supposed to relate to, or otherwise trust the opinion of. They appear on television, with large red titles, slow-motion video, and voice overs more appropriate for thriller film previews than anything else. They appear as signage on the side of the road. They even appear online, when I browse to local sites like the Seattle Times, ironically while reading an article about online political ads.

It's sad that there's a drag-race of sorts in the arena of political advertisements. Clearly campaigners must have evidence that these ads work, so they're pouring bucketfuls of money into all these channels, in an effort to sway the handful percent of undecided voters. And, most of the ads lately are much more in the "mudsling" camp, spreading fear, doubt, and uncertainty over anything else.

All I see in the ads is fear: fear that social security will be taken away, fear that terrorists will attack us, fear that immigrants will steal our jobs, fear that the economy will head south, fear that liberties we enjoy today will be gone tomorrow, fear of change, and fear of no change. Yes, we elect people to do certain things, and take certain stands that we want them to. But, I'm hard-pressed to find another job that someone has to apply for that depends so much on spreading fear about what would happen if the candidate was not elected.

So, until election day rolls around, I'll be shutting my eyes and plugging my ears next time I see or hear one of these ads. I've made up my mind as to how I'll vote, and I've done so without these multi-million dollar ad campaigns.

Tim Eyman Stands Up For The Discriminators

Anti-tax activist Tim Eyman is at it again. This time, he's filing an initiative and referendum aimed to repeal the gay rights bill passed by the Washington legislature last Friday.

Quote from the article:

"Politicians are deciding based on special interest group pressure and their own reelection calculations," Eyman said in a statement emailed to reporters. "The voters have watched this disgusting display of arrogance and selfishness for weeks."

I don't think this is the case. I think our elected representatives voted more or less in representation of their constituency. If you look at the Senate vote, for example, it wasn't a blow-out (25 yeas versus 23 nays).

Why is Tim Eyman striving to undo an act of our elected officials that aims to reduce discrimination?

The bill passed last week makes it illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation, in such key areas as housing, education, and employment. This adds to existing law that bans discrimination based on sex, race, religion, marital status, and disability, among other categories.

You may have moral or religious opposition to the concept of homosexuality, and I respect someone's right to have those beliefs. But do you really want to live in a state (or country) where gays can't hold the same job straight folks can, or where gays can't get schooled the same way straight kids can, or where gays can't buy or rent the same homes that straight couples can?

There was this declaration that we made not too long ago. Part of it reads:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Does Tim really aim to prevent someone with the opportunities for these pursuits, simply based on the orientation of their sexuality?

Seattle Voting Guide: Web Site Showdown - King County Council District 3

It seems that Kathy Lambert is running unopposed for the 3rd District's Council seat. Oh well, I guess I can still critique her web site on its own.

First up on the home page, I'm immediately drawn to those two, animated .gifs of the U.S. and Washington State flags. Wow! That's awesome! How did she do that? If Kathy has that much control over the pixels on my monitor, think what she can do with King County policy! Needless animation: -2

Moving on, I see Kathy adds a personal touch to the home page by signing her name, and presenting it in the form of a graphic. Too bad her web designer doesn't know how to make transparent backgrounds. Bad graphic: -1

There's a navigation frame along the top. I'll be objective here and say that, indeed, the frames do offer you a way to navigate the site. They don't make it more efficient, mind you, since the site is pretty flat and the pages aren't that long. But, what's with the yellow background? White text on black boxes on yellow background doesn't do it for me. Color: -1

And, why do I need footer navigation that's exactly like the header navigation, which is always present because of the frame? Needless duplication of framed content: -1

I wanted to post a link to just the Endorsements page here, but the site has trapped the right-click on the header navigation buttons, so I can't copy the link directly. Needless trapping of right-click: -1

The photo gallery is decent enough. But, where are the thumbnails, so save low-bandwidth connections the time it takes to load every picture? Is Kathy implying that she's not interested in modem users' vote? Lack of low-bandwidth consideration: -1

Go to any form on the site, and, without entering any content in the fields, hit Send. Hey, you get a nice thank-you from Kathy! Hey, great job not validating the form! Lack of form validation: -2

Overall, Kathy Lambert's site scores a -9. I looked for some good content to give her credit for the information she was delivering, but there's extremely little about her opinions, platform, and so on. I guess running unopposed means you don't have to really care as much. Congratulations, Kathy, your web site wins by losing!

Seattle Voting Guide: Web Site Showdown - Seattle Mayor

Ok, ok, so the vote by picture thing maybe wasn't the best guide in the world (a fun one, nonetheless). How about we try a different angle to decide some key elections? Let's look at the information each candidate delivers through their web site. But, more specifically, let's judge the web site itself and use that as a metric for who to vote for. Sound fair? Of course not. Let's have at it!

As a general rule for this and future Web Site Showdown posts, I'll use the ever-popular and highly subjective Points System to grade each web site. Criteria will vary by web site on the basic premise of what strikes me as I visit each site. I'll focus primarily on the home page of these sites, only because I love to skim and don't have time to nit-pick every page.

First up we have Greg Nickels versus Al Runte.

Color and Branding
Nickels's site was created by someone who most likely is used to designing print ads. Look at that giant orange-on-blue "Re-elect" text. Very in your face. Also pretty ugly. A thinly-ruled orange and white background further distracts from the main content area. Nickels: -2

Runte's site is pretty clean and toned primarily with a blue color that fades into his Seattle waterfront banner. A good bit of white surrounded by a light blue background adds welcome clutter-free space to the page. Blue's also a good choice: lots of people like blue. Runte: +2

I'm surprised no one picked green, given we're the Emerald City and all.

Graphics:
Pretty poor Photoshop job there on Nickels's site of himself; you can pretty clearly see the white space haloing his head, due to a bad lasso job. Otherwise the graphics are average. Nickels: -1

Decent, albeit not great, shot of the city seafront on Runte's site. His headshot is nice and friendly, however; much better than his image in the voters' guide. Runte: +1

Content:
Nickels's site reads like a brochure. Not great, not bad. Nickels: +1

Runte's site is more like a blog, and feels much more current than Nickels's. The posts feel much more first-person and personal than Nickels's. Runte: +3

Layout:
Why does every page in the site have to feature that silly 3-step panel on the left hand side? Nickels: -1

Runte's site breaks no boundaries, but optimizes space in the center for content and doesn't repeat elements needlessly. Runte: +1

Useless Stuff:
Man, Greg, what is up with that banner of moving pictures at the top of your site? Try clicking on a picture - nothing happens! Why is that there? Also, why do I get to view every page as a PDF or in a popup, text-only window? Is there a reason why I get a breadcrumb on what is effectively a flat site? Hey, I get today's date at the top of the home page - thanks Greg, I forgot what day it was. Hey cool, I get to view only 5 news items on the News page. Uh...why? Why would I ever want to do that? Nickels: -10

Runte's site has some nit impracticality, but nothing that hit my priority list. Runte: 0

Missing Stuff:
Nickels, any thought to RSS feeds? A blog? Nickels: -2

Runte, you effectively have both. Runte: 0

Overall, we have Nickels at -15 and Runte at 7. Congratulations, Al Runte, your web site wins!

Seattle Voting Guide: A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Votes

Recently, The Believer published short book reviews based on one sentence selected at random from the book in question. Why limit this system to book reviews? What if we, say, look at people's pictures published in election guides, and use those to decide who to vote for? Great idea!

King County Executive
Both Ron Sims and David Irons look friendly enough, almost to the point of being neighborly. But, I don't know; being the Executive of King County requires more charisma. A higher level of poise and self-assurance, perhaps. An ability to enchant someone into going your way, one could say. That's why my vote goes with Gentry Lange. He's got that movie-star look of confidence, and that ability to hold your gaze while he tells you about his policy ideas on voting transparency. Pretty soon you'll forget what the topic at hand is, while you instead compliment Gentry on his well-tailored look.

Sheriff
Sheriffs are supposed to keep the peace. Most sheriffs I've seen (well, technically, they're Rangers) wear cowboy hats. Walker is a great example (played by that tirelessly obtuse actor, Chuck Norris). Now, who would look better in a cowboy hat, keeping the peace in King County? Sue Rahr, hands down. Greg Schmidt looks a bit too much like a television evangelist to garner my vote.

King County Council - District 1
Gosh, this is a tough one. Both Bob Ferguson and Steven Pyeatt look like high school science teachers. On that metric, I think Bob wins out on the techy/nerdy look. We need someone familiar with quarks on the council, after all.

King County Council - District 2
Larry Gossett is the clear winner in this photo race. He looks like a guy as comfortable sitting on the council deciding on policy as he does sitting in your backyard, enjoying a beer at a cookout. Brian Thomas looks downright angry at you, and Morgan Catha looks like he's fifteen.

King County Council - District 3
Well, Kathy Lambert is running unopposed. I think that's why she looks so happy. And confident. I mean, talk about the comfort of knowing that you're pretty much guaranteed another term. Has to be nice.

King County Council - District 4
Wow, more happiness here. Both Larry Phillips and Ed Pottharst are just so happy to have the chance to be elected. This is a toughie...can I vote for Kathy again?

King County Council - District 8
Ah! A competitor to Kathy's happiness - John Potter. So, my first impression of Dow Constantine is he has the slick and finesse of a lawyer (indeed, he received a law degree from UW). That may serve him well in front of a jury, convincing people that it wasn't actually the defendant, dressed in a chicken costume, who robbed that convenience store while doing the chicken dance. But this King County Council spot needs someone a bit more casual. More friendly. More "chummy". Thankfully, John Potter fills that role quite well. I mean, c'mon: he's bursting with happiness and is ready to buy you and your kid a present for Christmas just for you considering a vote for him.

King County Council - District 9
While I admit my first inclination was to vote for Reagan Dunn (so much finesse!), on second glance he looks a little too polished. District 9 needs someone who isn't afraid to get in there and get his or her hands dirty. Shirley A. Gaunt-Smith's got the edge here. Reagan's suit is just too clean.

Port of Seattle - Commissioner - Positions 1, 3, and 4
If you're a Port Commissioner, you better have some sea legs. A sailor's life have ye, maybe with a tinge of pirate, to be able to control what comes in and what goes out of our ports. To that effect, Lawrence Molloy trumps John Creighton, Richard "Rich" Berkowitz beats Lloyd Hara (nice mustache, Rich!), and Patricia "Pat" Davis is ahead of Jack Jolley (I'll give you that Pat needs a sailor's hat to complete the image).

City of Seattle - Mayor
Al Runte has that laser-like, no-BS look in his eye. Like a hungry tiger, he's ready to pounce on the issues facing Seattle and tackle them to the ground. To Al, Greg Nickels must look like a gazelle.

City of Seattle - City Attorney
Come on, Tom Carr. Could you find no other lawyer in Seattle to spar with on the field of election battle? This is why you look so bored. Stop dealing with the issues and start looking for an opponent!

Federal Way Fire Department - Commissioner - Position 1
Mark L. Thompson. I'm severely disappointed in you. Much more so than Tom Carr, see. You couldn't find one picture to submit to the election guide? What gives? I'm writing myself in for this one, despite the fact I don't live in Federal Way.

Seattle Popular Monorail Authority - Board Member - Position 8
The Monorail is in trouble. If voters pass the revised plan, we'll need someone intimately familiar with all facets of the project to make progress. Cindi Laws looks decent enough...but wait, there's something about Beth Goldberg.... Ah! She's outdoors, which is exactly where the monorail will be! Beth is in her natural element here; she has to know what's she's doing with stuff that's out of doors.

========

You know, on a serious note, I bet these images actually do play a part in how people vote. If that's true, that's sad. Read up on your candidates and go vote, people.