the predictive value of the 2008 Washington State primary

Somewhat silly predictions aside, it's time to look at the results of the primary. A few observations.

1. Voter turnout was way below average in King County--around 20%, compared to 27%+ statewide--which may have artificially inflated Rossi's overall performance. Rossi's camp is probably praying this trend continues into the general election, since King County went 60% for Gregoire this time around.

2. As David Goldstein notes, there's no comparing this primary with the previous primary in 2004, in which voters had to choose a party, not any old candidate. The best comparison is between this primary and the general election of 2004. Provisionally, I agree with him that this is a "straw poll" for Gregoire, and that her win is a genuine win. In other words, since voters were free to choose any candidate, just as they can in the general election, the predictive power of the "top two" primary is considerably stronger than some, like David Postman of the Seattle Times, have claimed, even if Gregoire still isn't a sure thing.

3. Considering #1 above, and the natural incumbent advantage, and the fact that Gregoire's people are probably concerned that their candidate didn't top 50%, I'd predict that this primary motivates and mobilizes Democrats. Watch for a flurry of spending and campaigning, even more than last time, to secure Gregoire's lead.

4. Terry Bergeson has to feel great that she outpolled Randy Dorn. She has to be nervous, though, that "anybody but Bergeson" was the clear winner. If even David Blomstrom could siphon 4% of the vote, the electorate is clearly displeased by the current administration. Whether Dorn can rally all the opposition, though, remains to be seen. Blomstrom's probably going to call me a media whore no matter what, but I wasn't horribly impressed by Dorn's approach and his sketchy past--and partly due to Blomstrom's own efforts to raise tough questions about Dorn's past. Dorn seemed like the least worst option. I miss Rich Semler.

David Blomstrom: take out the clowns

David Blomstrom: Terry Bergeson's "chief opponent," or just another quixotic candidate a-blowin' in the wind? You make the call:

You're right...but you forgot to mention that that was probably the most scr*wed up election in state history. There were certain counties that had information about just one or two SPI candidates - or no candidates at all - on their websites. The Secretary of State posted a link to my website that led to a different website (not one of mine).

As usual, the corporate media scarcely mentioned any candidates aside from their favorites. In that particular campaign, they focused on the three women candidates, scarcely mentioning any of the male candidates. I was invited to just ONE forum.

So, yes, I fared rather poorly against candidates with far more money and corrupt endorsements, in the midst of a virtual media blackout and a political election that was nearly wrecked by the folks in charge.

To put it another way, the last election was just another free ride for Terror Bergeson. Which isn't to say the current election will be any less corrupt. Ultimately, the ball is in the public's court. Will teachers, parents and taxpayers care enough to get involved this time around?

Will people ask questions about Bergeson's bizarre relationship with Seattle attorney Judith Lonnquist and right-wing education assassin Don Nielson? Will people finally recognize the fact that public education is being privatized and take a stand?

Oops, sorry to bore you with ISSUES, something Terry Bergeson likes to ignore. You sound like one of the clowns who like to vote for establishment candidates with no issues but lots of money (and corrupt endorsements).

P.S. You might want to do a little research on the candidates I ran against last time around. What were their issues? How about their track records? Are they still fighting the good fight?

You might find the results illuminating.

I can sympathize with a Ron Paul type who is "scr*wd" by the established media just because of his outsider-ness. I have a much harder time sympathizing with a petulant rabble-rouser whose message is drowned out by his antics. (Media blackout, eh?)

Playing the educational village atheist might earn Blomstrom 6th place just by pulling out the protest vote, but it sure doesn't make him Bergeson's "chief opponent," unless we're using froth as a metric. Even Ron Paul is smart enough to know that publicly calling his opponents "whores" would doom his chances.

So complain away, Mr. Blomstrom, about "corporate media" (which you mostly ignored or avoided in the school board election, so no more whining about "media blackouts"), make up more clever nicknames for your opponents ("Tricky Dick" Semler? Richard "Dissembler?"), and by all means keep churning out amusing websites. If you somehow manage to reach the general election, I'll personally contribute $100 to your campaign.

Now, excuse me while I go strap on my clown shoes.



Sidebar:
If it weren't for the internet, David Blomstrom might win friends and influence people. Blomstrom, if you didn't know--and chances are you didn't--is running against Terry Bergeson. Sadly, his positions on the issues--the WASL sucks, education is being privatized and corrupted--get obscured by his rancor. At least, when he's sitting at the keyboard.

It doesn't have to be this way:

His appearance on the program — by phone — was absent any of the name-calling and ranting that characterize his Web site (he refers to his opponent as "Whorium") and he gave thoughtful answers to questions from the host and callers.

If the medium is the message, maybe Blomstrom just needs a better medium.