Here's what we gleaned from Primary Night 2006 in Missouri:
1) Katheryn Shields is done.
She backed Charles Wheeler in the hopes of maintaining some control at the courthouse. Wheeler was crushed Tuesday night.
And she hoped to parlay a Wheeler victory into a comeback bid for Kansas City mayor. This morning, she looks like toast.
2) Investing in Freedom Inc., the African-American political club, once again looks like investing in fool's gold.
Wheeler's supporters dumped thousands into Freedom as a firewall against a Mike Sanders victory. Once again, Freedom failed to deliver.
3) Never estimate the power of a well-organized, committed voting bloc. Jolie Justus turned in a powerhouse performance, winning by 3 points in the highly competitive 10th District state Senate race over Jason Klumb.
Justus' bloc: The Kansas City gay community that turned out in droves for their candidate.
4) Eastern Jack: more conservative and coupled with the stadium vote, a growing power in county politics.
5) Is age an issue? Voters rejected raising judges' retirement age to 70 (it's 65 now) and said no thanks to Wheeler, about to turn 80. What does this mean for Mayor Pro Tem Al Brooks running to succeed Kay Barnes?
Now, add your own.
Posted by Steve Kraske and Dave Helling.
Very astute post there boys. Prediction though: Katheryn Shields and Phil Cardarella will force voters to drag them out of power. They won't go willingly. She will still hang on to slim (to none) hopes of mounting a campaign for mayor.
Posted by: George | August 09, 2006 at 09:51 AM
Very astute post there boys. Prediction though: Katheryn Shields and Phil Cardarella will force voters to drag them out of power. They won't go willingly. She will still hang on to slim (to none) hopes of mounting a campaign for mayor.
Posted by: George | August 09, 2006 at 09:52 AM
Very astute post there boys. Prediction though: Katheryn Shields and Phil Cardarella will force voters to drag them out of power. They won't go willingly. She will still hang on to slim (to none) hopes of mounting a campaign for mayor.
Posted by: George | August 09, 2006 at 09:53 AM
6. If you're a white cadidate and you get an endorsement from Freedom Inc. it means you're a sucker who doesn't have a clue how to relate to blacks.
Posted by: joe Miller | August 09, 2006 at 09:54 AM
Wow. That was a weird glitch. Sorry about the triple post!
Posted by: George | August 09, 2006 at 09:54 AM
What I hope it means to the "powers that be" is candidates do matter. Voters do see through some, but not all, the negative and misleading ads, mailers, and recorded phone messages that we the voters have to suffer through each election cycle.
Age isn't an issue to me as long as I see some level of intelligence and competence. Endorsements by organizations and newspapers don't matter and I'm not sure they matter much to the voters anymore either.
Posted by: jenniferm | August 09, 2006 at 10:07 AM
I will second these thoughts. So Freedom spends a ton of money and they won what exactly? An incumbent state Rep race and Tindall in the County Legislature? As someone who lives deep in the Urban Core, I like to go with those who I think will get the job done. And Sanders won, here here.
Posted by: Reggie L. Grossman | August 09, 2006 at 10:15 AM
Helling and Kraske (Tool A & Tool B) just don't get it! Shields is toast for alot of reasons, mainly because she is rightly perceived as a corrupt politician. The result last night had little to do with her supporting Wheeler. Wheeler is viewed as too old and too tired to sustain the rigors of being the county executive. And the analysis of Justus' victory is way too simplistic. There is a strong progressive movement growing in this country. People on the left feel empowered to take a stand against the crazy right-wing propoganda machine that the Republican Party has become, looking out for corporate interests and those of the wealthy. Things are beginning to get bad enough, both politically and economically, for the "regular guy" to take notice. Ms. Justus' victory was not about gays coming out to vote, it was about the people of a progressive district saying "We want someone to stand up for us!"
Posted by: David Rouyer | August 09, 2006 at 10:16 AM
Justus mobilizing the gay community is only part of the story. She had just as many straight liberals as gay supporters. The secret was a strong ground game coupled with an exciting, energetic candidate. Klumb could never get the grassroots support, and everyone (including myself) overestimated the number of pro-lifers in this district (i.e. Flaherty support).
Posted by: | August 09, 2006 at 10:23 AM
Well.. Shields lasted three administrations. No matter what you complain about she did accomplish this feat. Everyone complains sooo much. Why didn't anyone vote her out last term, or the term before? I'm not taking sides, but no one knows if Sanders will make the county better or just bring in a new group of idiots. Only time will tell. I just hope someone can print off these blogs and review them four years from now. I'm sure opinion will change.
It seems like every administration comes in and fires a bunch of people, and bring in people who know less that the ones before. That's the only change I see.
Posted by: JJ | August 09, 2006 at 10:26 AM
JJ:
Sour grapes or not, you make some good points. The proof is in the pudding. I invite you to watch Mike Sanders and see what he will do. You're not just seeing the end of a political machine this week, you're seeing the beginning of better, more open and accountable government.
Posted by: George | August 09, 2006 at 10:33 AM
My opinion of a serious "under-estimation"? The statement "The Kansas City gay community turned out in droves for their candidate" with the insinuation that's the merit for a Justus victory. You're under estimating a district of informed voters who - more so on a whole than others - have moved on to issues beyond a persons sexual orientation. The 10th is a district in which there is a truer sense of community and knowing your neighbor and reaching out a hand. If you think Justus won in this district because the "gay community turned out in droves" ...you don't know Justus, and you don't know the people of the district.
Posted by: Wes | August 09, 2006 at 10:34 AM
"Katheryn Shields is done."
From your keyboard to God's ears.
Posted by: Richard | August 09, 2006 at 10:37 AM
Freedom Inc may not be effective with non-African American candidates, but if you're a habitual ethics violator (Michael Brown), disbarred lawyer (Keith Thomas)or convicted felon (Jemas Tindall, Carol Coe) than Freedom is the organization for you.
Posted by: KCDem | August 09, 2006 at 11:10 AM
First, I'm sure that everyone in the metro genuinely wishes Dr. Charles B. Wheeler a Happy Birthday tomorrow.
But having just heard Wheeler's announcement that he will be celebrating by "having a fundraiser at the museum at the Downtown Airport that bears Wheeler's name," I don't want anyone to be fooled into actually giving money at that fundraiser. Such a fundraiser is being held for one reason, and one reason only, and it doesn't have anything to do with Charlie's birthday!
It has everything to do with Shields and Cardarella being able to get paid off! Or have you forgotten how much money they "loaned" the Wheeler campaign at the last minute ($20,000?), so that ever-popular 3rd party committee (Good Gov'ment) could run those innane ads to tell voters he "never missed a vote that mattered" and "Charlie Wheeler has Integrity."
Don't be fooled. By all means, go to the party. Wish Charlie well. Everyone in the metro does. But don't give the Shields crowd another dime!
Posted by: countyshmounty | August 09, 2006 at 11:13 AM
If Kathryn Shields decides to run for political office again, there is a LARGE AND HIGHLY MOTIVATED base ready to put in the hours, energy, and effort it would take to be certain she went down in defeat.
Posted by: | August 09, 2006 at 11:20 AM
George 9:52 The word slim and Katheryn Shields and her appetite for power should never be used in the same sentance. I know there is a large base of voters and campaign workers that would motivate to defeat any attempts by her to win as mayor. Go ahead Katheryn the great flush that fundraising down the toilet and bring your little dog Phil "Toto" too.
Posted by: | August 09, 2006 at 11:53 AM
The whole race with Mr. Wheeler is very sad. He will not even admit defeat, or Shields will not let him, over very large numbers for Mr. Sanders. If it was a close race, I could see asking for an inquiry, but not with the numbers. Also, many of us straight liberal in the 10th district voted for Ms. Justus. With a history of people like Tim VanZant and Beth Lowe, why do you think only the gays voted for her and supported her. "Johnny come lately, I move to a residence where I think I can win" Klumb should go back to rural Missouri where he came from.
Posted by: | August 09, 2006 at 12:31 PM
I agree with 10:23. Referring to Jolie's bloc as gay does a grave injustice (please pardon the pun) to her as a candidate and to the constituency of the 10th senate district. Jolie never would have won that race had she relied only on the gay vote - there just aren't enough numbers there. Jolie won that race because she's the right candidate for this district and has a lot to offer. Clearly 33% of this district knows that. Here's hoping the other 67% come around!
Posted by: | August 09, 2006 at 12:44 PM
I agree that the analysis of Jolie's win is too simplistic. It fails to give the residents of the 10th District any credit for recognizing who really knows and cares about their concerns and who is just opportunistic. I know a number of people who voted for Jolie yesterday, and they are all heterosexual. Congrats Jolie on a well run campaign!
Posted by: robin | August 09, 2006 at 12:49 PM
Don't mess with the Blunt's. Just ask Mark Wright. His whole campaign was against the governor and he barely beat the convicted felon on the ballot and didn't carry one county in his so-called base.
Posted by: | August 09, 2006 at 01:20 PM
One thought on the 2006 Primary: Mike Sanders is an absolute political force - winning every ward in Kansas City. Over the last twenty-five years or so, I don't recall ever seeing coalition building on such a grand scale.
Posted by: | August 09, 2006 at 01:49 PM
I am just glad that KLUMB IS DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: smartie | August 09, 2006 at 02:03 PM
Charlie Wheeler marginalized himself when he agreed to work with Shields, Phildo, and Glorioso. I assume Pat Gray will chalk this up as another loss.
Sometimes people want change, and when they find a candidate that will take their county, state or nation in a new direction, they'll support them.
The endorsements of some groups in Kansas City are having less and less of an impact on voters - the groups who do endorse the wrong candidate need only look in the mirror and ask, "Is this the right person and can they win?"
Posted by: | August 09, 2006 at 02:10 PM
Strange to see two power brokers of opposite views, SENATOR CALLAHAN & COUNTY EXEC. SHIELDS dragging others down.
Posted by: SJP | August 09, 2006 at 04:52 PM