Tukwila Talk

Building a better community every day!

Yesterday, a blog post was posted here on Tukwila Talk. I wrote a comment but the poster decided not to allow it. So I am posting my comment here and some additional thoughts. So that you understand what I'm responding to, I have copied yesterday's post below.

Here is the post from yesterday entitled "Same old story":

"As Chuck has said, always follow the paper trail.

Proof of my assertion the Tukwila City Council works together in a close knit group discouraging any new blood lies in the PDC forms. Please note that the incumbents went as a group, outside King County, to a professional firm to manage their campaigns. It should be noted that one candidate who filed in the hope of filling the seat held by Joe Duffy, joined the group in these docs."

Here is my response:

LOL! Your innuendo machine is up and running early this election season. There is no "proof" of anything in your post.

It seems reasonable for a serious candidate to hire a professional firm to help navigate election law and as a campaign resource. I have some questions for you.

1. There is no box to check on the PDC form as to whether a candidate went as a group or as an individual to hire a firm. Do you have first hand knowledge that they went together or are you just making this up to insinuate something nefarious?

2. It seems to me that a candidate would hire a successful, experienced firm to help on a campaign. It sounds like going out of King County upsets you. What firm would you hire here in Tukwila or in King County that meets that criteria?

3. Is it possible that this firm is the best, most economical one to hire?

4. How does candidates hiring the same consultant restrict new blood on the council? Anyone who meets the criteria set by statute can file, hire a consultant, run, and win if his/her ideas resonate with the voters.

5. I have no idea how many campaign consultants there are in the Puget Sound area. Do you?

6. Why do you care who they hire as long as it's a legal company and they report expenditures?

Some thoughts about elections:

We need serious candidates for our elected offices -people with ideas to improve our city and school district and the willingness to work hard for our votes by explaining their ideas and listening to/interacting with voters. It's good for candidates to get advice on campaigns. I'm glad we have the PDC so we can get information on campaigns but the forms and regulations can be a maze to navigate. Having a professional to help with that, allows a candidate to campaign, have a "day" job, continue volunteer work, and spend time with family and friends. We want well rounded people working for us because life experience enriches a candidate's perspective. Voters have the responsibility to listen, question and decide based on knowledge, not gossip or insinuation.

I have no patience for innuendo, negativity, and opposition for opposition's sake. The sole purpose is to sling mud and cover up what we should really be discussing - specific problems, opportunities, and improvements for our city. Haven't we had enough of that at the national level? Look what we ended up with!

Views: 149

Comment by Pam Carter on May 18, 2017 at 9:23am

Well said Marie!

Comment by Charles Tyson on May 18, 2017 at 8:15pm

It ain't no innuendo. I am pleased one of the incumbents got a challenger today.

I received nearly 30% of the vote against an incumbent two years ago, despite being physically unable to doorbell. My showing, despite a lack of the type of outside monies collected by the opponent, showed clearly there is a great deal of satisfaction with the Gang of Seven.

I have a decision to make tomorrow. My current position on the TPMPB is up, and I cannot file for a council position also.

Comment by Marie Parrish on May 18, 2017 at 9:39pm

I'm all for people running for office. Voters need a good pool of people who are willing to serve in public office.

I do have a problem with people who insinuate and make up stuff to denigrate and harass others. If you choose to run for any office this year, I hope you will confine yourself to a discussion of the issues. You might have gotten a few more votes last time if you had slung less mud.

Comment by Charles Tyson on May 19, 2017 at 8:43am

I did not sling any mud, and back up all assertions with documentation or have it available for anyone who wishes to view it. You and a select few continuously speak in vague terms, such as "make up stuff", "insinuate", "harass", etc.

Speak in specifics. I have gladly debated the facts and am anxious to continue doing the same. I get to the point when critical of the priorities set by our officials and the direction our City has drifted.

Comment by Marie Parrish on May 19, 2017 at 12:39pm

You do/did sling mud, harass, insinuate and makeup stuff. You say things that are simply your opinion and/or a negative interpretation of events and present them as proof.

One example, two days ago, you made up "Please note that the incumbents went as a group, outside King County, to a professional firm to manage their campaigns". Where's your proof they "went as a group"? Even if they all have hired the same consultant, that's not proof they "went as a group". You ignored my questions in my original post. Answer if you have first hand knowledge about their actions that backs up your statement, (day, time, who can verify) and let us all know what you know about hiring campaign consultants.

Tell us why you care if they hire the same consultant. I have no idea how many good, successful campaign consultants there are and I bet you don't either. But if I were running for office, I'd get recommendations from knowledgeable people who had hired consultants just like I do when I hire anyone for any job. That might mean I hire the same consultants as other candidates.

You didn't answer any of my questions above because you can't. (If you can, do it.) You just want to make something out of nothing, create scandal from nothing. If you have issues with council members votes, then post about that. Post what you would have done differently. Present your arguments about issues but stop with the innuendo. The only person it reflects on negatively in the minds of thoughtful readers is you.

Comment by Charles Tyson on May 19, 2017 at 3:10pm

You are using the same words and not backing them up with any facts.

When I said they went as a group, I to an out-of-county firm, I did not mean to imply they got got into a car together and drove to Edmonds. What I meant is it is very peculiar these individuals are using the same party(ies). .It is obvious to thinking people that this is another incident where it is easily concluded none of them have a mind of their own. They are clones.

Comment by Marie Parrish on May 19, 2017 at 5:34pm

It is not obvious. It is not peculiar. That is simply your opinion and you should label it as such, not call names or insinuate some grand scandal. A serious candidate would ask around, get recommendations and hire the best one he/she can afford. You have no proof they got together and made one decision. It is just as likely they came to the decision individually.

If you disagree about votes or ordinances or zoning or budgeting, say so and say what you would do instead. That is a worthwhile discussion.

But what you do is part of the increasing trend in political conversation of going on incessant personal attacks instead of discussing the issues. You are not as bad as someone like Alex Jones who just makes up absurd stuff out of thin air, but in some ways you are worse. You take a simple fact (they evidently hired the same consultant) and turn it into a conspiracy.

Comment by Charles Tyson on May 19, 2017 at 5:57pm

Have you ever seen any of the Gang of Seven come up with an independent idea? They are seven cloned clowns.

Comment by Pam Carter on May 19, 2017 at 6:14pm

Sorry, but I have to second Marie's comments. There are a limited number of campaign consultants, so I hear the same names over and over. It's a pretty far stretch to state that using a single consultant means candidates are clones. It is evidence that you enjoy jumping to to conclusions - and often ones with which not all people would agree.

Comment by Charles Tyson on May 19, 2017 at 9:18pm

My question was not answered.

Comment

You need to be a member of Tukwila Talk to add comments!

Join Tukwila Talk

© 2017   Created by Chuck Parrish.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service