June 10, 2004
Phil Busse Launches Post-Election Version Of 'Me For Mayor' Campaign
Will Push Platform Items As An Independent Group
Even during the primary election campaign itself, Phil Busse said that regardless of the outcome, he intended to take his platform and push its ideas into the City's political and policy conversations. We got our first information about the possible forms this post-election involvement of the Busse camp would take last week, but this past Monday Busse made the announcement public:
With the new tagline "you don’t need to be mayor to get stuff done," Act Two for Me for Mayor is currently gearing up. We are developing a board of directors. This summer we will co-host a series of townhall meetings with the two candidates for mayor and the two candidates for city council’s seat number four.
(Of course, we assume he means Commissioner No. 1, since the Commissioner No. 4 seat was clinched by Randy Leonard, barring any write-in effort against him for the general election.)
In that post, Busse also offers fifteen items from his campaign's top 100 list that he and his supporters hope to bring forward, including small-scale cultural items such as a Summer movie series in Pioneer Courthouse Square as well as larger economic-development plans such as a week-long international bike race.
As a note and something of a disclosure: We were invited to participate on the board of directors Busse and his people are putting together for this new phase of their Me For Mayor concept, but we declined. While we obviously have no inherent objection to both covering the news and making the news -- since we endorsed Busse in the Mayoral primary while indeed he was doing both -- on a personal level such an arrangement would be an uncomfortable one for us.
It will be an interesting effort to watch, if only because it's important (just as Busse implies) that people who were committed enough to politics and policy to run for office, or support someone running for office, continue to remain actively and visibly involved after an election ends.
Comments (17)
Spine on 11 Jun 2004
We were invited to participate on the board of directors Busse and his people are putting together for this new phase of their Me For Mayor concept, but we declined. While we obviously have no inherent objection to both covering the news and making the news -- since we endorsed Busse in the Mayoral primary while indeed he was doing both -- on a personal level such an arrangement would be an uncomfortable one for us.
My two cents: the editorial "we" on this fine blog is a bit much.
Max on 11 Jun 2004
I agree, especially when it's actually only referring to one person. It's okay when it's "We aplologize for the error." But not, "we were walking down the street yesterday."
The One True b!X on 11 Jun 2004
Well, if the spell of Abigail Scott Duniway ever lifts (as I've mentioned before, it was a book of her writings from the 1800s suffragist newspaper The New Northwest which led me to the editorial we in the first place), perhaps some of you will get your wish. In the meantime, you're out of luck.
Pete on 11 Jun 2004
Keep the we. Change nothing, except maybe your cash flow.
anonymous on 11 Jun 2004
all of this makes me want to puke...
The One True b!X on 11 Jun 2004
All of what? This site? Local politics? Phil Busse? Life in general? The options are endless.
Jesse on 11 Jun 2004
Just as Ms. Duniway served to broaden the news base beyond her cursed brother's newspaper, The Oregonian, so does Communique beyond, well, The Oregonian. Ms. Duniway deserves to live on as does the Communique. Keep the we.
Jim Clay on 11 Jun 2004
b!X,
Please keep doing what you're doing, and keep being yourself. If I wanted the same old crap I'd have lots of choices. And I would shop at Wal-mart. This is just one quirk that reminds me that I've arrived where things are a bit different. Nice.
Mark on 11 Jun 2004
The ubiquitous "we" is irritating, but not half as much as the crap that B!X is forced to cover.
Steve on 13 Jun 2004
Let's focus here. In the first true comment on the Busse plan, I just hope he doesn't confuse people into writing him in on the Nov. ballot and rather, that he make a clear endorsement of the candidate he thinks best. No Nader Affect please.
The One True b!X on 14 Jun 2004
My understanding is that a Busse endorsement is contingent upon one or the other of the candidates step up to the plate on issues Busse will be pushing.
John on 14 Jun 2004
Nobody's going to "step up to the plate" in any way that satisfies Phil's criteria, which is precisely the point.
Here's a question for you, B!x: why does every statement from any politician get treated like a self-serving lie except Phil's? Phil makes a claim that would be obviously manipulative and disingenuous from anyone, yet in his case it's treated like the great lost turd from the butt of Jesus, held up like the one piece of truth in an otherwise lying, cynical time.
I like your idealism, but ALL of these people claim to be the true idealist in the field of liars, and you ought to be more careful which ones' claims you buy into.
The One True b!X on 14 Jun 2004
why does every statement from any politician get treated like a self-serving lie except Phil's?
You'll have to back up this claim first, since I'm pretty sure it's a generalization that can't be made.
Phil makes a claim that would be obviously manipulative and disingenuous from anyone
What claim, exactly. I haven't even seen any claims, only an announcement of what "Me for Mayor" is morphing into.
The One True b!X on 14 Jun 2004
Also, remeber that I was the one repeatedly pointing out that Busse's promised "instant disclosure" of campaign contributions kept not happening, even though it kept being mentioned.
John on 14 Jun 2004
> What claim, exactly.
That claim being the one in which Phil will endorse the candidate who most embraces his positions. See #11.
> You'll have to back up this claim first
There's no question that a statement from Phil gets taken at face value, where the identical statement from, say, Jim Francesconi would be treated as dubious and politically motivated.
Perhaps you'll disagree --and in fact I'd HOPE you'd disagree. My hope is that you'll bring a more critical eye to your treatment of Phil's positions and statements.
anonymous on 06 Jul 2004
i would have to say that i completely agree with john... a more critical and less biased eye would be much appreciated.
i would also like to ask you and your reader's to consider phil and his intentions...
i do not support him because i do not believe that i have heard any discussion about long-term solutions from him. really, the 100 list was gimmicky; the $100 per cause/organization would not make any difference other than promote phil as a "good guy". the agenda i hear him promoting most of the time benefits the middle class, so many recreational activities. he'd make a great recreation director at portland parks and rec. what do you think would happen at pioneer square if there was a movie night and homeless people wanted to attend? phil is a "good guy" and would say they are invited, too... why don't we talk about them instead of phil? he bores me.
Mikey on 10 Jul 2004
As a former (and i suppose now that we are doing an "act two", current) volunteer for Phil Busse I think the negative comments are really strange. I'd recommend checking out Phil's platorm to anyone who felt the Top 100 was too "easy". And I'd also point out that Phil isn't done, and a large part of this campaign was to show people what politics can do and that anyone can get involved (hence the "me for mayor" URL). I don't mind people critiquing Phil or his mayoral run (case in point, the complete disclosure, something Phil promised without knowing the work involved to get it online :) but at least come up with something better than "I don't like him." Sheeesh.