My early takeaway from tonight’s election: a big night for reformers, and a huge setback for Mayor Luke Ravenstahl. Yeah, he beat Dowd — handily. But this comes as no surprise, and in any case, the mayor will be looking at a much different council a year from now. Which is about all one could have hoped for.
In the biggest surprise (to me) of the night, Ravenstahl has lost one of his most reliable votes on council: Tonya Payne in District 6. Don’t be surprised if she’s seen knitting a scarf with Sala Udin’s face on it in the months ahead. Meanwhile, in District 4, Ravenstahl lost a chance to replace another reliable vote, departing councilor Jim Motznik, with ally Anthony Coghill.
The winner in that race was Natalia Rudiak, who ran a hell of a smart race — and whose rivals ran incredibly dumb ones. This was the race I was most interested in, in part because from the outset, it seemed possible that Rudiak would benefit from Coghill and Patrick Reilly splitting the old-guard vote between them. What no one could have anticipated, though, was that the two Dems would end up bickering over the Democratic Party endorsement — a fiasco that couldn’t have gone any better for Rudiak if she’d scripted it. What she did script was a smart ground game and a great message. The best-run campaign of 2009, in my book.
Of coure, it wasn’t all good news. For some bloggers, the big disappointment will be that Theresa Smith absolutely trounced Georgia Blotzer in District 2. This outcome is hardly surprising, but honestly, some of the attacks on Smith have struck me as kinda desperate and over the top, especially given Smith’s short stint on council. I’m not sure she’s the automaton that some have made her out to be. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, of course — won’t be the first time. But in any case, tonight’s results suggest that Ravenstahl’s coattails aren’t as long as the mayor might have hoped. I’m sure Smith will be thinking about that in the days ahead.
What are the lessons here? I think they’re pretty simple, honestly. One doesn’t need to buy into any sweeping theory of millenial change, necessarily. Candidates who are out of touch with their districts (Payne) lose. The power of the “Democratic machine” has proven to be overstated (again). So, to a lesser extent, has the power of the blogosphere … though probably its time is coming.
Another bonus win is Sharene Shealey in school board district 1. This is the one campaign I most wish I’d spent more time following. Shealey’s personal story is compelling, she’s smart and knowledgeable … and more than anyone else in this whole contest, she re-created that Obama coalition of black voters and progressive Democrats (I know lots of folks in the 14th Ward loved her). In this race, and a couple of others, tonight’s results promise to be something progressives can build on.
This article appears in May 14-20, 2009.
![Best OnlyFans Accounts [2024] Top OnlyFans Girls & Models to Follow!](https://i0.wp.com/www.pghcitypaper.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/image6-1.png-1.png?fit=950%2C621&ssl=1)
“The power of the Democratic ‘machine’ has been overstated (again). So to a lesser extent, has the power of the blogosphere … though probably its time is coming.”
Understaning and acknowledgeing your qualifiers — when the hell has ‘the power of the blogosphere’ ever been stated? This strikes me more as immaculate MSM schadenfreud, or ‘piling on’ an overestablished meme, than a correction.
It’s a fair point, Bram, and you’re right to call me on the old dodge of using a passive-voice construction when you [EDIT — I mean “I”] feel like knocking down a straw man. (Though honestly, I’ve probably given the blogosphere a disproportionate amount of attention myself.)
As for schadenfreude … that’s not it, I assure you, even though you and I have differed on some aspects of the district 2 campaign. First, in a big-picture sense, I don’t see any cause for *schaden* here: Yesterday was big for everyone who believes in shaking up the power structure, bloggers included. Second, it’s not necessarily the fault of bloggers if the blogosphere doesn’t have the influence they might wish for (yet). A big part of it is about voter demographics. There are some races where online activity is going to have more impact than others.
In the case of district 2, my guess would be that your door-knocking for Blotzer did more to help her than anything anyone posted online. Similarly, I’m guessing Rudiak’s victory was the result of having boots on the ground — and her opponents tripping each other up — rather than anything published by those of us in the litter-box-liner business.
Like I told you on the phone Chris…your comment about us at Coghill and Patrick Reilly campaigns running such “incredibly dumb ones” is completely out of line and completely off base.
Nothing else could have been done to change the outcome of this race from our end and I’m sure the Reilly campaign would say the same thing.
If Coghill or Reilly take on Rudiak head to head she gets stomped. No one from outside the 19th Ward can beat a strong 19th Ward candidate.
For those following along at home — Matt and I did have a talk about that “incredibly dumb” line. There was, as the diplomats say, a full and frank exchange of views.
Matt asked me what, exactly, I thought the campaigns had done that was so stupid. I said that I thought neither Reilly nor Coghill had taken Rudiak’s campaign very seriously — that they were too focused on beating each other. Matt’s response was to ask, essentially, “OK, smart guy, how would YOU would have advised Coghill to beat Rudiak?”
In my sleep-deprived state, I confess, I couldn’t come up with an answer. I still can’t.
Partly that’s because Hogue and I agree that a critical factor in the race was that Coghill and Reilly were bleeding each other of votes in Ward 19. And also that Rudiak benefited from a hometown advantage in Carrick. (I wrote as much in a post yesterday morning.) Plus, Coghill’s retail, old-school approach to politics has worked in the past. It nearly toppled Jim Motznik four years ago, in fact. And had a couple hundred votes gone the other way this time around, we’d all be praising Matt’s genius.
But the old-school approach didn’t work here because two guys were using it — and because there was a third, very viable, candidate who wasn’t.
Because let’s face it: Rudiak was exceptional. She had local roots, but access to plenty of money from outside the district. She could talk the talk on policy issues, and she’d walked the walked in terms of volunteering for the community. Ascribing her victory to her rivals’ shortcomings does a disservice to Rudiak, too.
There’s not much a campaign manager could do about that stuff. Should Coghill have moved to Carrick? Enrolled in the Heinz school and the Coro Center, like Rudiak did? Tried to cut the brake lines on Reilly’s car?
So, yeah. To say the Reilly and Coghill campaigns were “incredibly dumb” was wide of the mark. We could always second-guess their tactics here or there, of course. But at bottom, I don’t think Coghill and Reilly lost because of something they did to themselves. They lost because of what they did to each other, and because of what Rudiak was able to do on her own.
“If Coghill or Reilly take on Rudiak head to head she gets stomped. No one from outside the 19th Ward can beat a strong 19th Ward candidate. “
More importantly for us anonymous residents, no one can beat someone whose seat is bought by people outside of the district. I don’t really have a problem with Rudiak — I’m just glad Reilly lost — but I am peeved that her victory blurb has the nerve to describe her campaign as “grassroots”! Being “grassroots” *actually means something* that some of us actually value, and I hate to see it distorted by someone who won by taking checks from national Big Labor PACs and busing in her supporters.
Perhaps you should have filled a few more potholes Matt?
My my, How did those potholes get filled so fast anyways?
I saw video of Rudiak’s acceptance speech somewhere.
Her vote total was announced: great applause.
Reilly’s vote totals were announced: some impressed, approving, very gracious applause.
Coghill’s third-place vote totals were then announced: biggest applause of the night, and at least slightly evil-seeming.
The soap opera continues??
” My my, How did those potholes get filled so fast anyways?”
Because the City 311 service works well for me.
“In my sleep-deprived state, I confess, I couldn’t come up with an answer. I still can’t.”
Here’s a few ideas for Matt H:
1) Spend less money on yard signs and more on contacting voters
2) Spend less time bragging about how Rudiak would come in third place in comments on various blog posts and more time on contacting voters
3) Spend less time at doors telling voters that they should vote for your candidate because the mayor supports him and spend more time outlining an actual vision for the district.
I also think that it’s pretty insulting to say that Rudiak would not win against one candidate from the 19th ward. She recognized the landscape for what it was and was smart enough to put together a winning campaign. That’s what good candidates do.
From where I’m looking, she beat Reilly in Beechview, she tied Coghill in Brookline, and she beat both of them in Bon Air, Overbrook, and Carrick. That’s a winning forumula, and she did this because she’s an incredibly smart and hard-working candidate.
“I also think that it’s pretty insulting to say that Rudiak would not win against one candidate from the 19th ward.”
Wouldn’t happen and will never happen.
“Spend less money on yard signs and more on contacting voters”
Has nothing to do with it.
Everything you said Emma had nothing to do with the election.
We did have a vision and we talked about it at the doors. I am still looking for some concrete issues and plans for Beechview from Rudiak. She talked in big broad strokes and unfortunately it worked.
Matt, I don’t think that you’ve got much credibility when it comes to saying what mattered and what didn’t in that election, based on the results. Especially considering your continued mis-characterization of the district, your opponents campaigns, and the race.