Alger: No County Fed Endorsement
Following a vote of the LA County Federation of Labor, Democratic 38th Assembly Candidate Jim Alger did not recieve their endorsement.Labor cited Alger's leading the opposition to the 18% DWP rate hike, as well as his failure to support the controversial International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers contract with the LA Department of Water & Power as reasons for the denial.
Posted by Mayor Sam @ 2/13/2006 11:21:00 AM
33 Comments:
That's the problem with labor, if you stand on principles they will never support you.
Algers' accomplishments in defeating that rate hike have saved ratepayers millions.
Alger failing to support the IBEW Contract showed leadership.
He stood for what was the right thing to do and once again paid for it.
While I am sure the newly founded anti-Alger camp of 2 and 1/2 will jump on this, I admire the hell out of the guy.
He had to know he wasn't going to get the endorsement going into the room. Takes guts to walk into a hostile room and stand tall. Alger has done that now twice in the last week. Once in the Democratic Women's group that was founded by his opponent and now with the County Fed where his opponents husband is a union organizer and has been twisting arms to cut Alger out of the game. Both times he went and stood tall. That is a leader if ever there was one.
Gutsy move Jim. I think you'll be just fine.
Did Mitchell make a call to the county fed?
Contrary to what he may think, Mitchell doesn't have that much power.
Lyn Shaw, wife of labor boss Jim Hilfenhaus getting an endorsement from labor is like getting one from her mom. That is why they attacked Jim's endorsement from Julie Butcher of SEIU.
Certain endorsements you expect, Lyn getting labor you would expect. Isn't going to help her on bit in a conservative district, but she isn't interested in winning the general election anyway. It is all about the central committee for her.
As the previous poster said, I wouldn't read to much into the unions not supporting Jim. Any labor that Jim Alger gets is just a "pick off" from Lyn.
What is going to get Lyn in a world of trouble is the strong-arming her husband is doing behind the scenes. That backlash has already begun.
If all Lyn wants is the Central Committee spot it can easily be solved. Make a deal with Alger to be his alternate(doubt he wants to be on the CC), drop out and then put the party resources behind a Democrat pickup.
That would make sense. The rumor we heard in Santa Clarita is that Alger was willing to give Lyn some CC appointments to unite for a Democratic pickup.
She is clearly better positioned as the "insider" and Jim is certainly better positioned as a "community candidate". My guess is Smyth's biggest fear would be if these two joined forces. But as I said, that was a rumor.
If Alger and Lynn got together that would undoubtedly be a powerhouse in the 38th.
Frankly, it would make the race much more interesting and might even position the Democrats for an upset.
I'll go you one better. Lyn backs Jim, she gets the CC seats and in two years when Levine terms out, Lyn moves over into the 40th and Jim supports her over Stuart.
Now THAT would be a plan. Makes way to much sense for the democrats to figure out... better draw them a map.
No endorsement for Jim. They didn't come down with a YES for Lyn did they?
I want to no why if we all get it--Lyn is only running for the Central Committee apointments--why Labor doesn't? Wouldn't they want to endorse a real candidate who will run a real campaign and challenge anti-worker candidates like Smyth?
Labor does get it. They want those appointments to!
Yes, Lyn got the endorsement, why would you expect any different?
The bottom line is they don't believe the seat is win-able by ANY Democrat short of Bill Clinton so they will give it, or try to give it, to Lyn as a "thank you for all your work."
If you add that to her husbands strong arming people from other union leaders, to democratic clubs and the result is that most people just cave in and give it to them.
Lyn has not gotten a single endorsement because anyone thinks she is the better candidate, she gets hem because either she is "friends" with these people for years or they don't want to cross the labor union husband. Her entire speech is always "I have worked on this campaign and that campaign" like a Hollywood starlet name-dropping. Never 1 ounce of substance.
After the primary, they will all be kissing up to Alger and if he had any sense at all he would tell them all to screw off. He will win the primary, everyone knows that. But doing it against all odds will position him as a hell of a strong candidate in November.
Remember, Jim Alger gets his strength from the people, not the special interest groups. Last I checked, organized labor was a special interest group.
If Lyn is going to offer any deal to Alger, or vice versa it better happen soon. Once Alger is 100% convinced he will win, he will have no motivation to give her anything.
The only thing endorsements do is make you think you can win.
She is spending all of her political capital on this race and if she pushes Alger to far she will be left pounding rocks in the sand while the Algerites march off to November. The funny part is, if the rumors are true she doesn't have to.
She could call for unity behind Alger, get some Central Committee appointments and say she fell on her sword "for the good of the party". Jesus that would put her high on the hog and at no cost to her.
If Jim loses in November, she wins if he wins in November she could take credit for an Assembly pick-up which would be huge.
Sounds to me like the smartest move, but what the hell do I know?I have only been doing this for 23 years.
What do you think of the earlier post that said Jim should support Lyn for Levine's seat over Waldman?
Certainly seems like a better seat for her given how left she is.
I will say this, the endorsements she gets will say allot more about the people giving them to her than they do about her.
I agree with the earlier poster who said that nobody thinks she can win in November so to endorse Lyn is nothing more than blatant favoritism, not what is in the best interests of the district.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I am not sure about Levine. Waldman is pretty much the next in line for that seat, as Lyn was for the 38th. But she would undoubtedly be better placed there.
The truth is that if they kicked some money into the race they might be able to beat Alger. Then again, Alger has a base and it is a fight they shouldn't want to have, especially if they don't have to.
Jim is doing all the right things. He is staying on message and going to the tough interviews even the ones he knows he won't get. That is how you win.
However someone on his campaign needs to get him away from this and all other blogs. I can tell he stays reasonably connected because he does post occasionally (although the morons who act as if he lives here, talks to himself and campaigns at the same time are just that, morons).
My free advice to Mr. O'Connell would be to keep your candidate off of here and let your staff deal with it... if it needs to be dealt with.
Jim doesn't need this crap in his head when he is speaking in front of large groups. Candidates never tell you how stressed they are but a good campaign will see it before they fall apart in a room full of voters.
Most of us on here support Jim because we have seen him from the start, but as the campaign moves forward their will be blistering attacks that he does NOT need to hear or see. That will get in his head, make him want to respond and get you off message which is what they want.
You don't want Jim swinging at ghosts, so with that caveat... just keep doing what your doing and you will wake up June 7th a winner... and then realise your only half way there.
I am not sure about Levine. Waldman is pretty much the next in line for that seat, as Lyn was for the 38th. But she would undoubtedly be better placed there.
The truth is that if they kicked some money into the race they might be able to beat Alger. Then again, Alger has a base and it is a fight they shouldn't want to have, especially if they don't have to.
Jim is doing all the right things. He is staying on message and going to the tough interviews even the ones he knows he won't get. That is how you win.
However someone on his campaign needs to get him away from this and all other blogs. I can tell he stays reasonably connected because he does post occasionally (although the morons who act as if he lives here, talks to himself and campaigns at the same time are just that, morons).
My free advice to Mr. O'Connell would be to keep your candidate off of here and let your staff deal with it... if it needs to be dealt with.
Jim doesn't need this crap in his head when he is speaking in front of large groups. Candidates never tell you how stressed they are but a good campaign will see it before they fall apart in a room full of voters.
Most of us on here support Jim because we have seen him from the start, but as the campaign moves forward their will be blistering attacks that he does NOT need to hear or see. That will get in his head, make him want to respond and get you off message which is what they want.
You don't want Jim swinging at ghosts, so with that caveat... just keep doing what your doing and you will wake up June 7th a winner... and then realise your only half way there.
If Mr. Alger monitors this blog, I would like some answers to my questions regarding his criminal history.
Announcing vague details about his arrest and conviction on Dec 23 seems so calculated to avoid closer examination.
Please see my 6:03 entry.
No. You have been slinging mud in every post Alger is in for a week now. All to avoid discussing issues that matter.
We get it you hate him.
So I guess he does not intend to answer questions about his criminal history.
Mr. Alger and his supporters on this blog have made many accusations against a lot of people. Many of these accusations suggest improper behavior without any real evidence of wrongdoing.
Mr. Alger was convicted of a crime. Requesting a full accounting of the facts regarding the arrest is reasonable.
He demands accountability of others but apparently does not hold himself to the same standard.
He has a lot of energy and seem like a smart guy but I do not see the Democratic Party or the residents of the 38th District supporting a candidate convicted of a serious crime.
The crimal history of a Candidate for our State Assembly does matter.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
8:22'
a whole 2K more than Jim? he'll never be able to raise that kind of money. i guess this one is over and just when i was going to break my piggy bank and fork over my $2
it's like watching two gay men boxing it out (not a pretty picture)
If you're going to post anonymously, at least everyone should pick a "stage name" or something. That's what I like about Archie Bunker and/or Phil Krakover. I don't know WHO they are and I don't generally agree with them, but at least I know it is the same person.
If you aren't capable of doing at least that - you're just big pussies.
Your insistence that Alger lied with words like "appears to have lied" "if he lied" and so forth indicate how desperate you are to resurrect any dirt you can find.
Jim didn't fill out a form right 10 years ago, who cares. Where has he lied about it??? HE DIDN'T! He disclosed it when he had no obligation to, which is how you and any paper who reported it found out. Now 3 months after he issued 2 press releases about it you want to make hay out of it. WH=hen he was young and dumb he made a stuipid mistake by failing to check a box on a form. All the veiled accusations in the world won't change that.
All the while Lyn still doesn't give one word as to any ideas she has for the district.
Distraction distraction distraction.
How is it possible to lie about details he never provided? Oh that's right it isn't.
I don't give a damn what he did 10 years ago I care what he will do for the next 6. His good works certainly outweigh any dumb mistakes he made when he was in his early 20's.
"Please review Mr. Algers own statements regarding a variety of folks. He has made may accusations with no real evidence."
I have and nowhere does ha attack a mans wife and he supports what he says with facts.
Now you deny going after his family when you finally crossed the line and got called on it.
If your such a "concenred voter" with questions, identify yourself.
"If Mr. Alger was aware that an opposition candidate was arrested and lied about it, he would be the first to call him on it."
Mr. Alger is aware of much more than you think sir. Including histories of opponents and their family members. He chooses not to throw mud because that distracts people from talking about the issues, which is what your lame attacks are designed to do.
Alright kids - how many times do we have to go over this? We don't attack people's families with garbage.
Don't make Mayor Sam exercise his nuclear option. Internet users leave tracks, don't forget that.
I'll be fair - you be fair too.
Folks -- I am an Alger supporter (might as well get that out at the start). I think all of you who want to slam Jim for his efforts and successes on behalf of the community are pitiful. Get a life and get off of attack mode. None of this is fruitful in any way. Please --
1. People are illogical, unreasonable, and self-centered. Love them anyway.
2. If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish ulterior motives. Do good anyway.
3. If you are successful, you will win false friends and true enemies. Succeed anyway.
4. The good you do today will be forgotten tomorrow. Do good anyway.
5. Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable. Be honest and frank anyway.
6. The biggest men and women with the biggest ideas can be shot down by the smallest men and women with the smallest minds. Think big anyway.
7. People favor underdogs but follow only top dogs. Fight for a few underdogs anyway.
8. What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight. Build anyway.
9. People really need help but may attack you if you do help them. Help people anyway.
10. Give the world the best you have and you'll get kicked in the teeth. Give the world the best you have anyway.
{Anyway: The Paradoxical Commandments: Finding Personal Meaning in a Crazy World
by Kent M. Keith}
A smear campaign or smear tactics are deliberate attempts by an individual or group to malign another individual or group's reputation. They are also commonly referred to as "mud slinging". Common targets are public officials, politicians, and political candidates, but to a much lesser degree, the term can apply to the attempts to damage the reputation of private individuals, for example witnesses in the context of a trial. The smear campaign is related to the concepts of propaganda, media bias, yellow journalism, as well as falsehood-related terms such as libel and pejoration. In the extreme, smear campaigns can take on the character of a widespread persecution, as in the case of the dolchstoslegende before WW II.
Smear tactics are especially common whenever they may be used to undermine those presenting an effective argument or critique. A famous example in the 60s involved as its victim, Ralph Nader, then a car safety campaigner. General Motors engaged private investigators to attempt to 'dig dirt' on Nader in order to 'smear' him to deflect public attention from his, to the manufacturers, troublesome campaign for safer cars. Eventually General Motors was forced to publicly apologize to Nader. American Car safety legislation was considerably bolstered and many car safety features including seatbelts, were introduced and car accident death rates began to fall drastically, despite ever busier roads.
Smear tactics differ from normal discourse or debate in that they do not bear upon the issues or arguments in question. A smear is a simple attempt to 'rubbish' a group or an individual and to seek to undermine their credibility.
Smears are very often distortions, half-truths or even outright lies, and are commonly unverifiable rumours; that is to smear by gossip spreading. Even when the facts behind a smear are shown to be without proper foundation the tactic is often effective because the target's reputation is tarnished before this is known.
Smears are also effective as a distraction, pulling attention away from the matter in question and onto the individual or group. The target of the smear is typically forced away from addressing the issue at hand into a rearguard action defending their reputation.
Smear tactics are considered by many to be a low, disingenous form of discourse. Nevertheless, the tactic is very common.
Yes, and we ALL notice that your only seeking that "Transparency" from one candidate.
I am an attorney and I can tell you your statement is hogwash.
The law is written so that once the information is deemed to be false, materiality and intent are ASSUMED.
This is nothing more than a red herring to detract people from thi issues that your candidate refuses to discuss.
You would not be the first attorney who was wrong. Read the appropriate sections Alger could have been convicted of. They say things like "knowingly" and with "intent".
This is not implied consent.
Mr. Alger can clear this up by coming clean.
You sir are not only wrong, it is painfully obvious you are trying to stir up mud.
Give it up. We don't care and you aren't a real voter you are a supporter of the other side which is why you do not demand the same transparency from them.
Well, the other side has a Felony Conviction that has NOT been dismissed for selling narcotics in a school zone. So you'd better get to asking those questions.
Jim disclosed his past, did not hide from it and his openness is why you even know about it. His case was dismissed which means the conviction no longer stands. All you can do is try and stir it up, but their isn't much to stir up, he didn't fill out a form right... big deal.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home