The Moderate Washingtonian

Outlook on politics and elections in the state of Washington from an overall centrist viewpoint. My views tend to be libertarian in nature, but at the same time are largely nonpartisan.

07 December 2008

King Co elections director race - an update

We now have three filed candidates for the position, all Democrats: Ross Baker, Lloyd Hara, and Jason Osgood. A fourth candidate, Ted Maroutsos, has the skeleton of a campaign site up but has yet to file.

Newly-speculated candidates since my last post on this subject include Ellen Hansen [D], elections director under Randy Revelle in the 80s, Julie Anne Kempf [D], elections superintendent until 2002, and businessman/past GOP state house candidate David Doud. Kempf earned a dual endorsement for the spot along with David Irons from Toby Nixon's Citizens for Accountable Elections group.

Not sure yet if Senator Roach will be running, as it seems she's currently too busy trumpeting bullcrap on the O'Reilly Factor with Ken Hutcherson. Not to go off on a capitol display-tangent, but much as I usually oppose Gregoire I totally support her on that.

Regarding the outlook on the race, as I said in the discussion on the last topical post I think Lloyd Hara is the most likely to end up on top at this point. Democrats aren't reeling in the netroots here and that means Osgood will surely stay in, and with as much courthouse support as Baker has I'd imagine he stays in as well. Hara's almost certainly got the most name recognition of the group and that's probably going to be enough to get him to 25% or whatever the winner will end up getting.

I'd be inclined to support Hara personally, though I'm no longer registered to vote in King County. He's probably the most moderate out of the three declared Democrats and has oodles of local government experience. I still like Fain and Hemstad on the GOP side but figure that neither has the organization to win and if either are going to run they need to get in the race ASAP.

Labels:

19 Comments:

At 6:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am personally glad to see that it looks like Lloyd Hara dodged the bullet and will not be indicted. However he had oversight and review over a massive fraud and he do nothing to stop it. Our taxpayer money squandered and Lloyd Hara either could not do his job or would not do his job. Sure without the scandal Lloyd Hara looks like the front runner but how do we ignore the mess he is neck deep within?
"Port not yet sure whom to punish over contract fraud"
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008478465_port07m.html

 
At 10:17 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oy Vey,
We are not talking about the employees stealing scotch tape at Christmas time. This is millions and millions of dollars that the taxpayers were cheated out of and Lloyd Hara needs to answer for it.

Lloyd Hara ran for Port Commissioner.

Lloyd Hara took the oath.

Lloyd Hara cashed the paychecks.

Lloyd Hara somehow missed the hundreds of millions of FRAUD waste and abuse.

Will Lloyd Hara pledge to not accept money from anyone who does business with, works for, or uses the Port Commission?

Not being indicted is not automatically a qualification for further office.

 
At 1:25 PM, Anonymous Aubergine said...

At GOP organizing mtgs this weekend in King County both Pam Roach and David Irons were very vocal about them being active candidates.

Former Port Commissioner Alec Fisken has also said he is likely to run. Clifford is definitely in the race.

Doud, Fain, Hemstad,Hansen are probably not in.

Agreed that this is probably Hara's to lose. Hard to see any of the others being able to get much of the vote.

 
At 1:46 PM, Blogger Barry said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 2:14 PM, Blogger TMW said...

Aubergine, thanks for the comment regarding Fisken. I hadn't heard his name mentioned, so that's definitely news to me.

 
At 3:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jason Osgood had a clear majority of support from the grassroots and Democratic PCOs at Saturday's King County Democrats re-organization meeting. And I wouldn't underestimate his name recognition following the SoS race. He is building up a volunteer campaign organization beyond what anyone else mentioned can touch. This will help him quite a bit. I think Osgood is the candidate to beat at this point.

 
At 9:14 PM, Blogger TMW said...

I find it a little sad that Democratic activists are apparently so ready and willing to get behind a candidate who was able to twice lose the county to a Republican. Even against a liberal Republican like Sam Reed that's a noteworthy statistic. I don't doubt that Osgood will perform well with the netroots and some party activists but I think we need to remember that represents a small fraction of the Democratic and Demcoratic-leaning electorate. It's these other voters who might not be paying quite as close attention to the race as the Osgood folks but still go out and vote and will probably do so for the most familiar name.

I could see this race following a similar track to the 43rd House primary from 2006. We're probably going to have our netroots candidate, our experienced candidate, and our establishment candidate. It's going to be close, but if we look back to that race Stephanie Pure was the most popular amongst the netroots and still came in 4th in a six-man race.

 
At 8:47 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

For someone claiming to not have a "partisan axe to grind" you are grinding and spinning like crazy. What gives? If it is not "partisan" then was your cousin promised a job?

You are all over this issue like an old working girl when the fleet is in town. Come clean and tell us why your heels are wiggling in the air?

 
At 11:36 AM, Anonymous Aubergine said...

Interesting that Hansen and Huff are now in the race. Either would have the inside track as being the most qualified candidate (and please, netroots, now ad-hominem attacks just because someone other than Osgood is seen as by far more qualified).

Hurts them though that they are BOTH in the race and splits the vote of those who are really looking for someone who can actually do the job.

This thing is getting so atomized that it becomes difficult to call.

If 10 candidates are in there, it might just be that a Roach or Irons gets in w. 15% of the vote. Won't be able to hold it three years later though.

The Comments from Anonymous @ 8:47 are uncalled for. Typical netroots to make uncalled for personal attacks if someone doesn't agree w. them entirely.

 
At 1:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Aubergine if you left the Anonymous 8:47 post so that you could try to make Jason Osgood look bad as Aubergine than you are decidedly disingenuous. Maybe it is just happenstance but this fish smells funny. If you did not leave the 8:47 I apologize.

Just because Jason is the most qualified does not mean he is the only qualified candidate.

 
At 6:09 PM, Anonymous Hara Campaign said...

It's not even filing time, and already two smears are being propagated in this column ... ironic, because the intended beneficiary of one (and probably the intended beneficiary of the other) is out of the race.

Jason Osgood has dropped out and thrown his support to his perennial nemesis - Sherril Huff!

Jason, to his credit, has a solid record of opposing the kind of politics exemplified by the "health" smear.

AS to the "indictment" smear, try this on for size:

How did these frauds at the Port come to light? Performance audits.

What was the central theme of Hara's 2005 campaign for Port Commission? Performance audits.

What new method did Hara win national acclaim for as a state budget analyst, county auditor and city treasurer in decades past? Performance audits.

Cashing big checks? Ha!

And anyone who has followed developments knows the scandal in question involves Port staff caught defrauding the Commission ... and getting nailed for it.

Apparently, somebody wants the Director's office a little too much. Let's hope they end up sitting somewhere else.

 
At 6:39 PM, Blogger TMW said...

Methinks 8:47 Anon is unaware of the definition of "partisan." Are Osgood and Hara not both Democrats? Clearly it isn't a partisan issue.

I've always been open about my support for Sam Reed and I suppose that part of the reason I oppose Osgood's candidacy is that. I didn't think he was qualified to be secretary of state and I don't think he's qualified to have King County's equivalent office. It isn't anything personal, I just think that the office requires somebody with more experience. Being nonpartisan doesn't mean that I won't take positions on candidacies or issues, it just means that my opinions aren't likely to be simple rehashes of party talking points.

 
At 7:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

TMW you wrote:
"Methinks 8:47 Anon is unaware of the definition of "partisan." Are Osgood and Hara not both Democrats?"

Cut us a break; your blog and your thread and who gets hammered?
Osgood and Hara, that is who. You are not a Lloyd Hara Partisan you are slamming the Dems for the Republican that you are working for. Why else would you post attacks on Hara and try to make it look like an Osgood supporter.

Why don't you lay off Hara. You already admit hat you were out to get Osgood. I suspect that you cooked up the Aubergine posts as well. You are a cheap republican hack attacking Democrats.

If your candidate is worthy of the office you don't need to smear Lloyd Hara to help

 
At 8:31 PM, Blogger TMW said...

You truly are hopeless. I don't want to see Pam Roach or David Irons in there any more than Osgood. Right now Hara is the best of the group and I've said as much, yet you float tinfoil hat theories that I'm posting as Anonymous commenters bashing everybody. If you're so concerned with the integrity of those posting in this discussion, perhaps it's time you stop hiding behind your Anonymous label, as well.

 
At 8:40 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just got an email that Sam Reid might be behind this hatchet job on Lloyd Hara. Why? Could he be worried about Hara 4 years from now?

I suspect Hara might be a bit tired of your support about now. If you want to exchange names just post yours here with your home phone number.
Timothy D.

 
At 8:45 PM, Blogger TMW said...

At his age I'd wager Reed retires in four years. Though if this last election taught us anything it's that he's popular enough that he can scare off the opposition from challenging him.

Personally, I don't care what Hara or any other candidate thinks of my commentary. I'm simply a citizen providing my opinion in an open forum, nothing more, nothing less.

 
At 12:00 AM, Anonymous Aubergine said...

Odd over-reaction by the netroots crowd again. Those black helicopters hovering outside their windows probably make it difficult to concentrate. Throw in a few conspiracy theories, etc.

Odd though that they seem to think that by your saying Hara is the best of the bunch that you are smearing Hara?

Writing as Aubergine I can definitely say I'm not TMW. Different people.

That is big news from the Hara campaign if Osgood is truly out and supporting Huff.

Saw some articles in the Times - Fain pulled out on Monday and Hemstad did the same last week. Look to be no moderate Rs left in (or getting in) the race at all - just Irons/Roach.

This thing has already taken some impressive twists/turns.

 
At 8:25 AM, Anonymous Hara Campaign said...

As far as we are concerned, TMW's coverage is nothing more or less than fair comment.

As for other comments upthread, don't look to Sam Reed. In the context of this race, there are others more directly motivated to trot out cookie-cutter smears through anonymous surrogates.

 
At 4:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see Lloyd Hara is not only taking credit for the scandal at Port commission but now he is sucking up to sam reid. This reeks rankly and royally. I hear it rains in Seattle because of Lloyd Hara's public service.

Did flowers bloom before Lloyd ran for office?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home