I've become a solid Republican activist in my descent into middle age, but I'll still keep an open mind and might occasionally support a Democrat from time to time.
In this case, I've decided to throw the enormous clout of the Shark Blog behind Democrat Laura Ruderman for Washington Secretary of State.
I'm endorsing Laura Ruderman because of one very important issue. The Republican incumbent Secretary Sam Reed has been a big advocate of the proposed "Top Two" primary system, where only the top two finishers in the primary election would go on to the general election, regardless of party. As I've written before, this is a terrible idea, as it would essentially destroy the state's political parties, and favor incumbents and other candidates who enter a race with enough money and/or name recognition to build their own ad hoc party-like organization.
Laura Ruderman opposes the Top Two primary. As a state representative this year she did vote for legislation that would have established the Top Two system. But there was a lot of gamesmanship surrounding that vote, as many legislators expected Gov. Locke to veto selective portions of the bill to eliminate the Top Two system leaving a "Montana"-style system in its place. So I e-mailed Laura Ruderman recently to ask what her current position on the primary was. Her reply:
I was absolutely in support of the Governor's partial veto. I think that the way that the current Sec. of State wrote the "Top Two" bill would have led to huge opportunities for the parties to game the system. I think that the Montana is the best compromise (although actually, the way I understood it, Arizona's model might have been even better).The Arizona model includes optional party registration, while the Montana model does not, so Ruderman makes a good point.
Laura Ruderman has been one of the more moderate Democrats in the legislature. She understands the private sector, having held senior positions at Microsoft. She was the first Democrat ever elected from her Republican-leaning district, so she knows how to represent moderates and conservatives. She was among the minority of House Democrats who voted for charter schools. The Association of Washington Business rates her voting record in the top 25% of her caucus.
While I would normally prefer a Republican, Laura Ruderman is a very decent alternative to Sam Reed, who has let his fellow Republicans down. Please join me in supporting Laura Ruderman for Secretary of State.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at May 26, 2004 12:29 PMDid you ask Laura how she felt about the WA State Democratic party's recent meeting held on a Sabbath with 300 muslims present and developed resolution that stated the US should not give any foreig aid to Israel? Moderate or not, this is the party she belongs to.
Posted by: Naarski on May 26, 2004 04:24 PMI might run as the Libertarian candidate for Secretary of State. Anyone who can't stand voting for a Democrat but is mad at Sam Reed could vote for me instead.
Posted by: Jacqueline on May 26, 2004 05:08 PMI agree that Sam Reed went the wrong direction on the primary and wanted the ridiculous option.
Running as a Libertarian won't help. Oh, I remember, the Libertarians put Cantwell in in place of Slade Gorton. That's what I mean, it won't help. Just a protest vote. Run as a Republican or Democrat if you are serious.
Posted by: Ron on May 26, 2004 07:33 PMI agree with Ron, any serious candidate will run as a Repub or Dem. This will help define what it is you actually stand for. Also, running as either Repub or Dem will allow you more funding and support this way from voters, party headquarters, etc.
Posted by: Naarski on May 26, 2004 08:02 PM> Oh, I remember, the Libertarians put Cantwell in in place of Slade Gorton.
I thought it was the ultra-conservatives.
Posted by: Kirk Parker on May 26, 2004 11:10 PMLibertarians are serious, and a real political party, (unlike the Reform Party, for instance) so they deserve a place on the ballot. As the GOP increasingly establishes itself as a big-spender party, the LP will be the only remaining bastion for fiscal conservatives.
Mike
The Libertarian Party will only split the conservative vote and elect the left. The only way to affect public policy ramains the same, capture elected office. The only way to affect the policies of a political party remains the same, work within a party that has broad appeal and can acheive electoral victory.
I probably share many of your libertianian viewpoints but I vote with the Republicians because only the Republicians can hope to shape public policy in directions I can support most of the time. How can the Libertian Party achieve anything when it confines both it's own party and Republicians to the sidelines?
Even Larry Elder understands this. He now calls himself a Republiterian.
Posted by: Gary B on May 27, 2004 09:07 AM>
The Libertarians I know at work are proud that their candidate's vote in the 2000 Senate race was larger than the gap between Cantwell and Gorton. "Now we will get some respect" they told me. They claim that they defeated Gorton.
I do not disagree with Shark's assessment of Top Two or Reed's value to the party, but he is way off if he thinks Ruderman is a moderate. Ruderman is a smart, hard left leaning, politician who occupies a swing Republican district and knows it. She has played an effective game throughout her career working for left issues behind the scenes while taking enough token business votes to pass herself off as something other than a Leftie (only doing so once assured by leadership of a surfeit of D votes to defeat the business position). The way to truly tell a moderate is if they have forced leadership to back off of a bill desired by a key D constituency (labor, enviros). This is what Tim Sheldon did to D leadership in the Senate over ergonomics a few years ago. Ruderman has never done any such thing. She has never put Chopp on the line. She is a hard driving partisan and those who know her know her politics to be left of Hillary Clinton. She could cause persons in favor of clean elections, Republicans, much heartache as Secretary of State. Once able to build a constituency out of Seattle she will quickly abandon her here-to-fore pretence of moderation and return to HIllary-Left form.
Posted by: Curles on May 27, 2004 03:44 PM"She was the first Democrat ever elected from her Republican-leaning district ..."
Um, no.
Bill Finkbeiner, current Senate Republican Majority Leader, was elected by 45th district voters in 1992 as a Democrat.
Posted by: jimg on May 30, 2004 05:33 PMJust found this site. Funny, I'm a liberal Democrat who really didn't mind the new primary system, which makes me the opposite of you. I met Sam Reed last year and liked him, and his being opposed to electronic voting is definetely a plus. I may vote for Ruderman, but I'm going to give Reed a chance.
Posted by: Michael on October 6, 2004 08:16 PMSounds like your argument is actually one of the best reasons to not vote for her actually. Did you know she was just an admin at microsoft and her senior postion as a pm is something we let kids right out of college do? Her current job is doing temp work at a bank so you have to wonder just how stellar her resume is.
She is known for being very difficult to work with in Olympia and I hardly believe she is qualified to be in 3rd position behind the Governor. Does money alone qualify you to make decisions for your neighbors? I hardly think so. Take a look at Cantwell or was it Can't vote well for a good example of Laura's model
Posted by: cassie on October 13, 2004 03:13 AMThe meetings and Conventions on Saturday are a nescessary evil. Less forgivable was a state committee meeting on Yom Kippur. That one I would have loved to attend because it was the last meeting that I would serve as a committeeman.
There is one hard core anti Israel supporter at our meetings. He is rude to anyone who dares to argue with him. I do not know of any others.