Goings seems to have some difficulty with math. Bunney and Lonergan have more votes combined than McCarthy and Goings, and trends are taking McDonald to a clear majority.

And it seems that some of those "Democratic" votes are going Republican in later rounds.

Maybe Goings should be considering what might have been, not if the Democrats had limited themselves to one candidate, but if we had gone through a traditional primary and in the general election we had been presented with clear choices and an informed debate about the county's future. The muddle of multiple candidates and no clear messages was not a helpful development in politics.

RCV is san abberation supported by an ignorant electorate!!

Calvin, Calvin, Calvin...

This man presents as an intelligent student of politics and election processes. He presents as a masterful election organizer and a political tactician to be reckoned with. He sided with the party and grandstanded on a platform of embracing the ways of the party - let two candidates run and we will be stronger - work together and we will be better...one, two, blue. Then things weren't going well (I believe he had polling data that showed him trailing) and he ignored the RCV wisdom of cooperative campaigning and drove a wedge in his party. The soul searching should start in the mirror...right after the job searching, perhaps.

jimkingjr - you are right that Lonergan and Bunney combined to have more 1st place votes, but Lonergan's votes didn't come from Bunney...less than half of those who chose a second choice on the Lonergan ballots chose Bunney (at least so far). That is where the Republicans were short sighted. They will lose this election by supporting in whole a candidate that got very little crossover voters despite hiring a left-leaning consulting firm and casting votes against his party's platform to woo the left. They could have backed someone with a proven track record of appealing to Democrats and Republicans through his common-sense approach to open and accountable government.

Lessons learned for both parties, I guess. And hopefully a lesson learned for the electorate, too...not that RCV is bad, just a little about how it works and why the only throw-away vote in an RCV election is one not cast.

From reading these comments, one might conclude that RCV is all about strategems and gamesmanship. What about selecting the candidate that you expect will govern best? I predict the voters of Pierce County will soon be ready to embrace the Top Two system. I haven't heard any complaints in the aftermath of the first general election of the Top Two era, other than the whining of party hacks and minor party adherents that relish playing the spoiler role.

In the County Executive race, Mike Lonergan was able to participate in the November election. A substantial number of voters felt Lonergan was the best choice for Executive. A top 2 primary in August would have left Lonergan off the ballot in November and effectively disenfranchising his supporters.

Lonergan added to the debate and gave voters an option which we would not have had in a top 2 race. Since this is a RCV race, Lonergan did this without having to be a spoiler. More choice in November is a good thing for voters. Lonergan is a great example of this.

It is interesting how Diamler (r) is winning big in the 25th, but Calvin claims having one candidate would have changed the outcome in County Council District 2. It would not have.
He claims in the Assessor/Treasurer Race are equally outlandish. All three Republicans in the race are out pacing the one strong Democrat in the race.
.
Calvin's comments are short sighted and all about him. If he is looking for some one to blame it should be himself. Watch next month when he comes out and says he has a 7 point plan to fix RCV.
He lost because he failed to understand how RCV works.
He decision to attack the fellow party member cost him about 3-5 points and may have cost her 1-2 points. Play fair or go home.
.
Calvin should blame his campaign manger for a very poorly run race. That is why he lost.
It's not about your 6 point plan if you were king, rather it is about what the people want.
.
They don't want a candidate who is reckless.
They don't want a candidate who is divisive.
They don't want a candidate who attacks when threatened.
They don't want a candidate who doesn't take advice from others.
They don't want a candidate who is disrespectful.
They don't want a candidate who is narcissistic.
They don't want Calvin Goings.

Narcisitic? You be the judge.
Calvin uses I, my or our fifteen times.
He really belives it all about him.

Acadian - you have touched on an important issue. To best understand how we got RCV, one needs to go back to 2006. In September 2006, Washington State voters were forced to use the extremely unpopular "pick-a-party" ballot for the Primary Election. The system caused outrage amongst a large % of voters. Two months later, Pierce County voters were asked to vote on a new voting system called "instant run-off voting" aka ranked choice voting.

I believe that the voters in Pierce County didn't fully understand what they were voting for - but in their mind, wanted anything but the pick-a-party system they experienced two months prior. I would predict that if given a choic, based on what voters know today, they would select a top-two system vs. a RCV system.

As for Cal's email I received yesterday, his logic is totally flawed. Of course it is not a surprise he would find a way to spin the fact that after campaigning for almost 2 1/2 years, he finished an embarrassing third in a 4-way race.

Since he claims to have extensive experience in the private sector financial industry (can you say bank teller), perhaps Obama could use him in D.C. to help figure out our current economic crisis.

I don't see how having a lot of Democrats cost the party the race. I supported a less-popular Dem with my first vote, and more popular Dems with my other votes. If there were no second and third votes, my first vote would have been as wasted — and as costly to the Dems — as voting for Nader over Gore in 2000.

Because of the RCV math, my vote was neither wasted nor costly, it just went to my next-choice Dem — which was NOT Bunney, nor was it Goings. If RCV was to hurt Dems, it would only be when Dem voters prefer Bunney over one of the other Dems, in which case the voter is getting what he or she wanted, even if the party isn't.

RCV isn't a Democratic strategy, it's a mechanism to get the voters their most widely preferred candidate regardless of party. That's a good thing, and we should keep it. We need to stop thinking about blind loyalty to a political party — that's how horrible leaders like W get elected — and think instead about picking the best candidate.

Thank you for the refresher on the historical context of the RCV's advent, sloremodeler. Yes, the "pick-a-party" system, may it rest in peace with that wooden stake firmly implanted in its heart, was a truly objectionable arrangement foisted upon us by the parties. And of course, there was no way of knowing at that point that the Supreme Court would rule the way that it did on the Top Two. The Pierce County experiment with RCV is actually a good thing, I think, as it will give us all a chance to evaluate it as an alternative.

David W.,

You did not mention that Goings and his supporters went after fellow Dem Mccarthy in a negative manner. They sent hit pieces out in the mail and put up illegal yard signs and protested outside her office. They did nothing negative to Bunney either directly from the Goings' campaign or from Going's supporters doing Independent Expenditures.

Bunney, Mccarthy and Lonergan all ran positive campaigns, Goings did not. He tried to come off like a Jr Kennedy or even Obama but he could not help himself and tried to hedge his chances by going after Mccarthy. He messed up and turned the PC Dem party inside out and up side down.

And now he sends out an email that blames the Dems for allowing more than one candidate on the ticket. Goings like to control things to appease his own needs. That is how he got to be the youngest Senator in the U.S. - when the Senate seat was open in the 25 Leg Dist, he got the 25 Dist Dems to side with him versus a better candidate that was not cheesy like Goings. But he charmed the old timers and that was that. Even in defeat, he has not learned any lessons at all. Just like he has not learned any lesson about life since he has not done anything except be a politician for most of his life. And he is so far inside of his little universe of politics that he cannot see that the will of the voter out weighs the selfish goals of the politician. But now he has time to think about it.

A lot of people were hoping that Congressman Adam Smith's style and ability to connect with people would rub off on Goings, but now we feel Smith went out on a limb to help Goings win becuase he did not want Goings to run against him for his Congressinoal seat.

Regardless if Bunney or Mccarthy win, PC residents will be lead by a competent person. But more importantly, PC residents will be better off with the likes of Goings out of office.

Goings....going....GONE!!!!

Going next will be RCV!!

scottsch111--I am now dying to know WHO you voted for 3rd on the Exec ballot? You sound like you voted for three D's but in fact there was two D's an R' and an I that wasn't allowed to wear the R but who has been an R foot soldier (I mean that in a good way giggat) for years.

I know it's none of my business... but you are anonymous here. ....

Oh I forgot to say, Giggat, Dennyknowles -- both very well said, and forgive me for pointing out the fact that we all seem to agree.

Denny - Calvin did go negative on Bunney (actually the firefighters did it for him). You saw the site...it is still up in fact (bunneyvotes.org). The only one he couldn't go negative on was Lonergan.

jcathall - you made me laugh with your footsoldier comment...thanks. I know Lonergan more closely alligns with the R's, but I wouldn't call him a footsoldier. He has supported many D's and many D held values - when they make sense for the citizens he is hired to represent. Too often, though, when partisan politics get involved, citizens get left behind. Whether it is big business or labor unions, environmental concerns or builders - when we get out of balance and lean too hard one way or the other we risk hurting the very people we think we are trying to help.

Gigatt,

A person named Lynn Miller from Roy, WA owns the domain. Not sure who they are associated with.

If we use the first choices in the November election for an estimate of how the Top 2 primary would have gone, then Shawn Bunney and Pat McCarthy would have been the two candidates on the ballot in November.

No Goings. No Lonergan. Supporters of those two candidates would have been left without the ability to vote for their favorite candidate in November.

Giggat,

Denny did say that cal went negative.

Yes, Lonergan plays nice and shares values. I agree. The 'independent' banner thought didn't separate him from the widely held believe that he is an R any more than when McCain considered going Independent or Liberman.... (though liberman has become a real wild card at this point)

I think RCV gave us a greater opportunity to see the real character of each of the candidates and that next time we will do a better job of voting.

Kooking forward to the people determining that Top Two is much preferred over RCV.

jcathall - The funny thing is, though, the majority of folks that voted a second candidate on Lonergan's ballots voted a Democrat. Maybe all those who didn't select a second are Republicans, but we know that trends tend to hold in elections and if the trend is an indicator, he got more 'D' support than 'R' support. The belief you reference might be widely held for us junkies, but it looks like the electorate from both sides of the aisle voted strongly for him. I don't know quite how to do it, but I would be interested to know the percentages of Goings, McCarthy and Bunney first placers that put Lonergan second. I am sure there is a way through the data that is provided through the county's website.

BTW, this is the part of Denny's note I was referencing.
They did nothing negative to Bunney either directly from the Goings' campaign or from Going's supporters doing Independent Expenditures.

Denny - check out the administrative contact information for Lynn (the website). You will see the email address is @aff2175.org...that is the firefighters. You will also find Lynn's name co-signed with Pat McElligott (Tacoma FF union president) on a letter to the editor that identified Lynn as President of Pierce County Fire Fighters Local 2175.

Gigatt,

You make me proud! Excellent sleuth work.

I can't remember who said what in all the above, so my comments may appear disconnected...

1) Don't know if it's true (it came from a candidate for a Council seat), that the PC Dem club actually courted McCarthy, encouraging her to run against Calvin because they didn't want Calvin in the seat. Perhaps someone from the PC Dem club will confirm or deny, but I doubt it.

2) RE: the the trail of BunneyVotes.org - the contact info on the AIFF site points to my neighbor, a fireman.

3) I don't believe that Bunney or McCarthy are good for Pierce County.

a) My experience with McCarthy on the 15 abused horses case was evidence of her inability to admit fault of herself of staff--and her inability to fulfill a related public records request placed last Jan/Feb. As a past animal cruelty investigator, I am seriously disappointed at how poorly Pierce County Animal Services handled this particular case, and from what I've learned, MANY other cases as well. I realize that McCarthy did not ask to take on PCACS, but nonetheless she accepted it. Here we are, approaching 2 years later, and you still can't find information on the PC website as to how to report suspected animal abuse, or dead animals on the roadside, or low-cost spay/neuter/shot clinics, or PC animal related codes/laws. Hell, you won't even find Animal/Pet Services in the PC site's main directory or Services list. If one was persistent in needing to find this information, they might wander into the Auditor's site and be lucky and see "Pet Licensing" in the navigation bar, but that only leads to information on fee-based licensing services. You won't even find information on the horse summits which happened as a result of the 15 abused horses, or know that an adhoc committee has been formed and talks are finally on the table. Nope. And then there's the issue of her failure to provide adequate information on RCV - not to mention that she changed the original name "Instant Run-off Voting" (IRV) to RCV, creating a detachment to the loads of information available online on IRV. This is evidence of a person who has made the choice to neglect important responsibilities they accepted, and are being paid to manage. As Executive, which responsibilities will she neglect?

b) Bunney, whom I've paid keen attention to over the past 5 years, in my opinion would NOT work for the citizens, but instead work for special interest parties. He has refused to consider the concerns of many citizens regarding the serious state of our local environment. I recall him once responding to a citizen's comment about our environment with a "The sky falling" crack. Believe it or not Mr. Bunney (and others):

>> our streams and creeks are being killed by development
>> our wetlands are being destroyed by development and your "wetland mitigation" practices are a complete failure
>> the landfill is leaking methane despite the denial of "authorities" AND thereabout 90% of the state's contaminated soil is being dumped into the same landfill WHICH SITS ATOP OUR SOLE-SOURCE AQUIFER that supplies water to hundreds of thousands of people
>> Bunney voted yes on the 27-year multi-billion dollar exclusive contract with Lemay/LRI to continue to add to this landfill, whilst the Lemay/LRI financial controller served as his "volunteer campaign treasurer"
>> water purveyors tell us there isn't enough water to support new development and Bunney, as a councilmember, continues to turn a blind eye
>> six year on the council and Bunney (and others) still have not added the state's ecology laws into the Pierce County Code (therefore the environmental damage goes unpunished and unrepaired)

So what's a girl to do she doesn't have faith in either person, and to boot has put her opinions out in the public making it likely that neither person will even consider her past or future concerns? Well, I guess I just live with it and continue doing what I personally can do to help repair Pierce County. The council has been of little help anyway, and the executive has been zero help, so I likely won't notice much difference.

A voting system should not be evaluated based on whether a Democrat or Republican wins, but on whether the will of the voters is respected and triumphs. RCV promotes this, by putting the voters in control. It doesn;t matter how many candidates are running (giving voters more choice)...the logic of RCV allows a split majority to re-coalesce for the strongest candidate, without a "spoiler" porblem. This new voting system is great!