17 thoughts on “HGEA announces endorsements”

1. Keith Rollman August 10, 2010 at 6:40 pm

   Talk about burying the lead. HGEA endorses Hannemann. C’mon Ian, spit it out.

   Reply ↓
   1. Anonymous August 10, 2010 at 10:48 pm

      Your pushy comments don’t really help you make your case. Ian made clear that he was posting a complete list unlike the SB post.

      Reply ↓
   2. Shilling Again August 11, 2010 at 12:03 am

      It’s the safe choice. Neil is not known for political bullying and grudges, plus he is very pro-union, so if he wins, HGEA has nothing to worry about. On the other hand if they endorse Neil and Mufi wins … watch out.

      Sad.

      Reply ↓
   3. Gerald de Heer August 11, 2010 at 1:11 am

      Keith,

      The HGEA Announcement is significant; a game changer. Hanneman will be elected, baring a major slip up on his part.

      Ian’s story is about the full slate of HGEA endorsements and the decision by the union not to release that list on the Internet (so far).

      In this campaign, you are the de facto leader of the ‘539’ forces for Hanneman and against Neil Abercrombie. The Republicans nationally have Fox, by comparison Hanneman has you. If anything needs to be ‘spit out’ it is the nature of that relationship, how it works, and why the only connection between you and the Hanneman Campaign is coordinated by ‘coincidence’ and nothing else. How does that work?

      By the way, I am not opposed to what you are doing it, and Hanneman is ‘lucky’ in that sense, to have you. As you know, I truly respect your talents.

      Throughout the country, including Hawaii, people are indicating they have had their fill of politics as usual. Our version of democracy is best served when more people participate. Campaigns, as they are run now, raise levels of cynicism and disgust.

      Ian has been open about his preferences in his own blog. I feel he doesn’t pull punches. So, I give Ian a lot of credit for intellectual honesty.

      Political campaigns today are about destroying opposition through any means possible. You are swift-boating here and elsewhere. And we all know how that works. The official campaign perpetuates a half-lie about an opponent, and the unofficial-official campaign raises the half lie to a full lie. Than, a third tier of operatives start push polls and other whispering tactics which, when implemented, make the original half-lie ‘truth’ and the opponent is now defined.

      So, what is the real plan here, define Ian as a lefty pot smoking liberal who dodged the draft and is helping a comrade in arms conspiracy? Your posting is not about truth, it is propaganda. C’mon Keith, spit it out.

      Of course, you wouldn’t engage in that kind of McCarthyism. But we both know that the groundless smears have started and will peak accordingly. The phone banks are ready to go.

      With the HGEA endorsement, the Democratic Primary is close to a lock for Hanneman. And, if the past is any indicator, the tactics discussed here will ‘work’. That does not make them right.

      Reply ↓
2. Kauaiboy August 10, 2010 at 8:50 pm

   At the state level HGEA is just endorsing who they think has momentum. That’s the wussy way.

   Tim Bynum and not JoAnn Yukimura? That’s B.S. Tim is not popular anymore on Kauai.

   Reply ↓
3. Bill August 10, 2010 at 9:42 pm

   trivia question for those that are gloating — name the candidate that HGEA endorsed for governor in 2006?

   Reply ↓
4. Keith Rollman August 11, 2010 at 6:31 am

   Gerald,

   My “connection” to the Hannemann campaign is one of friedship only. I’m sure the campaign spending reports were scrutinized for any professional reimbursement…it simply wasn’t there.

   That said my comments and blogs are simply my opinions…the same opportunities are available to anyone who wants to exercise their first amendement rights.

   As far as your accusations of “groundless smears” and “lies” are concerned…if those are indeed directed at me…I challenge you to provide one example of what you’re talking about. Otherwise I say it is YOU that is doing the smearing by false accusation.

   I have never made a derogatory remark about Ian, and I have tried to keep my criticism of Aberccrombie based totally on verifiable facts. You suggest that people should participate in democracy…I agree…I’m just not on your side, and I hope your candidate loses.

   Reply ↓
   1. Gerald de Heer August 11, 2010 at 7:52 am

      Keith,

      How do you know who my candidate is? Who I am voting for?

      So, do you believe Neil’s wife is a witch (one of the ‘smears’ I heard, but that one is funny, since I am a Monty Python Fan)?

      Ian, thank you for the clarification, I meant “527” rather than “539”.

      Back to Keith, politics is, especially in Hawaii, a dirty business. So are you saying that you are not aware of any smear campaign planned against anyone? So, who, in your opinion is doing that? The Republicans? Neil Abercrombie himself?

      As per your involvement, fair enough, I will take your word for it. As per “Atomic Monkey”, the ‘facts’ stated were more ‘spin’ than facts. There again, there is room to disagree on interpretation.

      Hanneman is lucky to have you as a ‘friend’.

      As his friend, it is my hope that you will do all you can to ensure that he campaigns on higher ground, avoiding the low road.

      For the record, I know Neil Abercrombie and Mufi Hanneman, and remain genuinely undecided. Frankly, I am unhappy with both camps. Right now, my vote is ‘none of the above’, and when I have a chance, I will share thoughts about Abercrombie as well.

      Reply ↓
5. Pono August 11, 2010 at 9:31 am

   I am the only one who has noticed that Speaker Say and his acolytes are visibly absent from this list. I may be jumping to conclusions, but for House District 20 it reads “decision pending” and Dwight D. Synan is running against Say in the primary.

   These facts by themselves may not mean much, but look at the lack of endorsements for Say’s disciples. Here are some notable absentees: Jimmy Tokioka (D-15), Isaac Choy (D-24), Sharon Har (D-40), Ken Ito (D-48), and Pono Chong (D-49).

   In at least a few instances, the union is supporting the democratic challengers of Say’s allies. These include Roland Sagum (D-16), Rida Cabanilla Arakawa (D-44), and Vice Speaker Michael Magaoay who is running for the senate seat Bobby Bunda vacated to run for LG.

   Although Sagum and Cabanilla, at best, could considered as “on the fringe”, they represent votes Say can rely on to remain in power.

   As for Magaoay, HGEA’s support for Dela Cruz along with his service on the City Council could prove to be too great an obstacle for the Vice Speaker to overcome. It will also be interesting to see how the outcome of this race affects the balance of power in the Senate.

   This should be an interesting primary election.

   Reply ↓
   1. Ian Lind Post authorAugust 11, 2010 at 10:24 am

      Good eye!

      Reply ↓
6. Nikki Heat August 11, 2010 at 12:33 pm

   Pono:
   Still a lot of Calvin loyalists endorsed in the heart of Democratic territory (Neighbor Isles and the Kalihi to Mililani/Wahiawa corridor): Mark, Cliff, Bob, Joe, Gil, Angus, Kyle, Mele, Joey, John, Blake, Henry, Ryan, Marilyn, Marcus, and Jessica. While not all these reps are closely identified with the Speaker, they probably voted with him on the major issues (HB444 might have been the exception where the dissidents provided the margin needed to pass the bill).

   Add Karl and a few of his independent of HGEA old boys (and gal) and Calvin still has a more reliable (and canny) core of supporters than the dissident group (perhaps 13 incumbents) that can’t count and doesn’t have much to, uh, Say (and they’ve already LOST Glenn and Lyla).

   Reply ↓
   1. Pono August 12, 2010 at 10:18 am

      Nikki,

      Although an in depth analysis of HGEA’s endorsement of Say’s second stringers may be warranted, I lack the patience or interest to do so. Having said that, I think your post does warrant a response.

      In reviewing the endorsements of the 16 candidates you mention by name, most of them are the sole democratic candidates in their respective Democratic strongholds (I wouldn’t necessarily categorize D-47, Kaneohe to Laie, as a stronghold for the left leaning–Sorry Ian).

      The exceptions are Speaker Emeritus Joe Souki (I am assuming he is the Joe you allude to in your post), Joey Manahan, Blake Oshiro, and Henry Aquino.

      The observation I made in my previous post was not denying that Say supporters were being endorsed by the union. I was merely pointing out that HGEA strategically chose not to endorse specific candidates, namely some of Say’s closest allies.

      Interestingly, of the 13 House (Majority) Leadership positions, only 5 were endorsed by HGEA. Of those 5, only 2 (Souki and B. Oshiro)have primary elections. Why is this significant? The other 3 (Herkes, M. Lee, and Yamashita) supported HB444. In an election that could be issue driven for House and Senate candidates, keeping legislators that are sympathetic to the union may be more important than retaliation.

      I am not doing a good job at connecting the dots, so I will stop here.

      Another thing to consider is how important the Ewa plain may be to the union with reapportionment looming.

      Reply ↓
      1. Pono August 12, 2010 at 10:47 am

         In thinking about why HGEA hasn’t (yet; decision pending) supported Say, I could only come up with one reason: the House ‘s position against a GET increase that would have benfitted the union.

         Reply ↓
7. charles August 11, 2010 at 12:40 pm

   Say’s supporters are not missing.

   Reply ↓
8. Kolea August 11, 2010 at 4:15 pm

   I am disappointed in the HGEA endorsement of Mufi. Randy Perreira’s extended comments in the S-A article soften the blow somewhat, but I was hoping the split sentiments within the union would result in an open endorsement for the primary.

   I do agree with the logic of shilling again’s comment above. If Neil wins, he will rebuild relationships with HGEA. If Mufi were to win after an HGEA endorsement of Neil, there would be hell to pay.

   I suspect part of the reason might relate to concerns that Neil might revive efforts at “civil union reform.” From my posts on this and other blogs, people might know I do not buy into the routine demonization of public sector unions. But I do believe there are public employees who are not good at their jobs and the state would benefit by coming up with a fair system for “post-tenure review” of public employees in order to get rid of those with a bad attitude or who are ineffective at their job.

   I know HSTA’s leadership has expressed a willingness to discuss developing such a system for evaluating teachers. I would hope HGEA would also be open. I suspect they think Mufi is more likely to let things go on as they have, whereas Neil might actually force through some long-needed changes.

   Those two factors might make a Mufi endorsement safer, but it is still disappointing. We need some creative thinking in the Executive branch and that would be more likely with Neil in the Governor’s Office than with Mufi.

   Missed opportunity, HGEA.

   Reply ↓
9. Keith Rollman August 11, 2010 at 4:34 pm

   Gerald,

   The only activity that I have seen this time around that has risen to the actual level of “smear” is the mailing of good old fashioned letters mailed around town. They are aimed at Hannemann, and we have no idea who is behind them. They are pretty nasty. The ones purported to be from a well-know engineer are forgeries (they even spelled his name wrong.)

   Hannemann has no plans for any dirty campaigning, but reserves the right to examine Neil’s actual public record. Neil will say this is “dirty” campaigning as he would rather not deal with the issues. This was his response today at the publishers association forum when asked about his advocacy of offshore oil drilling, his acceptance of contributions from petroleum interests, and his labeling opponents of his plan the “environmental Taliban.” He didn’t answer the question just said it was “typical Hannemann personally attacking him.” These are all facts right out of the Washington Post…not “smears” or personal attacks. Neil has to man up and own his own record.

   If you can’t ask Neil about his past twenty years in Washington, there isn’t much else to talk about.

   Reply ↓
10. Open District Stories? August 11, 2010 at 7:36 pm

    I haven’t done the full comparison, but there’s probably a story or more about the incumbents who were *not* endorsed in the “Open” districts.

    Reply ↓

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.