We tried to arrange a debate between Republican candidate Jane Hague and Democratic candidate Richard Pope, but Hague's political consultant says he doesn't feel comfortable having Hague sit down with Pope. In a new mailing, Republicans portray Pope as mentally ill. A few years ago, Pope did tell a judge that he missed court deadlines because he was dealing with depression and the mental stress of a terminally ill father, a daughter diagnosed with autism and a failing marriage. But he says, he has never been convicted of a crime (though our producers did find he was ticketed for not wearing a seatbelt) and his life has since stabilized.
Hague meanwhile, is challenging her drunk driving charge, though she did publicly apologize for abusive behavior and swearing at officers on the scene. She's also dealing with revelations (first discovered by Pope) that she does not have a college degree, despite approving biographies and resumes that said she did. Add to that recent campaign violations, and Hague has her share of problems.
So who gets your vote?
She's charged with drunk driving, and admits campaign violations and an exaggerated resume. He once had a restraining order issued against him for allegedly "lunging" across a table. Who gets your vote?
Neither one of this individuals deserve my vote.
I can't believe that Jane doesnt have an appropriate answer for falsely having a college degree - she is in total denial about that issue as the drunk driving charge. It appears that she has a Larry Craig mentality about the whole process. She's hoping that we are gullible enough to carry her to another term. Accept a debate with Pope or get out of the race - Please!
Richard Pope
I watched your segment on Hague vs. Pope. While I'd initially considered re-electing Hague, your segment on this race has prompted me to re-evaluate my choice. For Hague to state that she'd be willing to debate and then to back out and/or not show up shows a discourtesy that bothers me as a voter.
Where is Jane? why is she hiding? This was her opportunity to be up front with the issues in her District and with Mr Pope. Granted we all have issues, who does she work for? Congratulations to Mr Pope for representing himself and the people. Confronting issues is not easy, he was open and willing to be exposed and wanted to make sure he put out his agenda for who he works for "The People from the Eastside" THANK YOU Mr. Pope you have my vote.
MY VOTE WOULD GO TO MR. POPE, IT SEEMS THAT MRS. HAGUE JUST WON'T ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR HER DRUNK DRIVING CHARGE AND IS TRYING TO USE THE SYSTEM TO HAVE IT DE-GRADED OR REMOVED. MRS HAGUE!!!!! YOU WERE DRINKING, YOUR WERE DRIVING AND YOU HAVE TO ADMIT THAT, BE REAL , BE HONEST!!!! MARCO
I plan on voting for R 67. I'm tired of the problems I keep hearing about involving insurance companies. And as I told my husband, that could easily be us one day.
I would vote for Pope because he is acting like a normal person and not side-stepping questions as Hague has been doing. He was under mental duress, something we all face at one time or another. I like his human side. He's just like the rest of us and I would prefer someone who understands what real people deal with and what real life is all about, rather than someone who tries to drown problems with drinking and then deny it.
If this is the best we can get for King County Council candidates then no wonder our traffic issues are still that--an issue. As a Democrat I will not be endorsing either candidate at this time. Maybe someone more qualified will enter.
It appears that there needs to be some controls on the insurance adjusters so insurance companies don't overly profit from not being reasonable to a client
Although neither candidate is ideal, my vote would be for Pope because he was willing to put himself out there and take the critizm. Hague, on the other hand, has painted a very poor image of herself by not coming forth and accepting responsibility of her actions.
We were undecided on 67 until we say your show, the adds on both sides are very misleading. The insurance companies should have to answer the claims of the public who pay the premiums, not the commissioner. Too many families struggle just to pay the premium when its due and to think they might not be covered in a timely manner is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!
Regarding Hague and Pope race, why should she get special treatment, if any thing there should be stiffer penalties for a public official then the general public, because they represent us and should adhere to a higher standard, just like our police, fireman, but she thinks she can make a case over what form was used THATS SICK SHE NEEDS SERIOUS HELP. Last time I checked King County Council included all of King County NOT JUST THE EAST SIDE. We are still undecided!
IF I was in King County, the only choice is Pope.
I am a conservative and not beholden to any particular party. Nevertheless, the majority of conservatives vote for Republicans.
I told my wife this mornign when Hague was tlaking about having her staff set it up that the debate wouldn't happen and Hague would put blame anywhere but on herself.
Voila! Ten seconds later that's what we heard.
No answer to the charge of falsifying her biography, either. Being a combat veteran, it rankles me no end when I hear people, the name Reverend Pat Robertson comes to mind, who lead others to believe they did something they didn't do. In the cases of the military, it's Stolen Valor.
Jane isn't in denial. She isn't evading. Purely and simply she is a bald-faced liar. If you return to your council a person with morals like hers, you get what you deserve.
Some people have no shame.
And one other thing: the allegation by the King County Republican Chair that Pope has admitted he has "mental disease" is so absurdly taken out of context it's nothing more than vicious, venemous slander.
Maybe that's why it's hard to get a Republican into office over in King County. With candidates like those, who needs 'em?
Damned poor choice of candidates most of the time, it seems to me.
I must cast my vote for Mr. Pope. Ms Hague's lack of credibility is the reason for my decision. The only way the voters can truely evaluate these candidates would be with a debate. Ms Hague lost my vote with her refusal to debate the issues, thereby educating the voters to their positions.
Mr Pope will receive my vote. This is due to Ms Hague's lack of credibility. A debate would have educated the voters to the issues important to each candidate. I find it inexcusable that Ms Hague refused to help her constituents make an informed decision.
I can tell from the false smile on Hague's face that she's carrying on a farce, the worst of which is her own denial. I would NOT vote for someone who's out there "allegedly" driving drunk, nor someone who will not directly address the issue of a "allegedly" non-existent college degree. Why can't she simply take responsibility for her own actions/mistakes? I sure don't want her representing my interests!
Hague is dispicable and should withdraw from the race. She's absolutely dishonest and has no right to be one of our elected officials. Her support of attacks against a single dad with a special needs child is particularly egregious. Pope, or actually almost anyone but Hague, is the one to elect.
Jane Hague is a complete disgrace. She is an obvious liar, and a drunk driver also. Time that she admits that she lied about her college degree, instead of changing the subject with silly soundbites. Also, Jane, admit that you drove drunk, and you're not fit for public office. Richard Pope may not be perfect, but he gets my vote, for sure!!!!!!!
Jane Hague is proven responsible elected official. Pope has proven that his behavior is erratic and unstable.
I also plan to vote for proposition 67 as our state insurance commissioner, a known consumeristm is in favor of it.
Thank you Robert, for great reporting on a consistent basis.
Hague's Cruella DeVille smile when she pointed-out that her DUI charges were "allegations" was pure evil. She's violated the public trust to the point where she has no credibility left, and won't be receiving my vote.
The Republican attacks on Pope actually have had the effect of damaging the image of their party in our area even further than before. When will these geezers ever learn?!
In spite of his personal judgements that have rankled and alienated people to which Republicans would normally would kowtow, my vote goes to Pope as someone who will stand-up to both Demos and Republicans alike and hold them accountable. He's an "unlikely" but honorable individual. We need more of those!
Like the majority of Republicans, Hague fails to answer the questions and attempts to redirect the negative attention elsewhere by not really answering them. Then she gives her fake smile as an appropriate answer. I think it is ridiculous to smear Pope's history and paint him as mentally ill. Typical Republican dishonest tactics. No Republicans will get my vote; I can see right through the lies. Also, there is quite a huge difference between DUI and not wearing a seatbelt, come on!
Pope - Hague is full of double-talk and seems incapable of giving a straight answer to even the simplest of questions.
Richard Pope
Pope.
Hague avoids all responsibility for her actions. Such as her drunk driving, falsifying a college degree, etc.
Robert Pope gets my vote. It was unbelievable how she dodged the question on her drunk driving (let's wait for the courts to decide??? How about you answer in the manner a public official should?) and then referred the reporter to her scheduler about a debate. That reminded me of Mitt Romney saying that he'd need to talk to his lawyers before committing to a presidential decision. I don't recall her answering one tough question directly. Pope might be a little erratic, but at least he appears to be telling the truth.
If I hade to vote and I don't'
I would vote for Pope.Hague should never again get the public's trust.
Richard Pope seems to be the more honest and honorable of the two candidates presented. I hold politicians in contempt who break the law, refuse to accept that they are at fault and and then attempt to place blame on the police who arrest them, their staff or anyone else but themselves.
Hague has also repeatedly lied about her educational credentials and dismissively rejected Mak's question about them. Why would I believe that she would represent my interests as a citizen of King County?
Her refusal to debate or even appear on the Up Front broadcast after a commitment to do so was reprehensible. Although I have voted primarily Republican in the past, I believe Mr. Pope is the better candidate here.
Jane Hague clearly demonstrated the typical political responses with all of her answers. Not a single straight forward one. You really want to vote for someone who can't even admit when she has screwed up? Someone who twists answers in such a fashion is clearly not trustworthy.
For the record, I consider myself neither Democrat or Republican. Pope may not be perfect, but at least he will go after who he thinks is wrong, regardless of party. We need more people like this.
I can't believe what I'm seeing in the comments above. While it is true that Hague has some issues to deal with, a look at the ISSUES IN THE DISTRICT shows that she is the clear choice. Pope has run 10 times, losing every one. He has been rated Not Qualified for office each of those times. Hague, personal issues aside, has a record of delivering for the eastside. If any of you would take the time to look at the records of each candidate, I bet this supposed swell of support for this consistent loser would wane.
As corporations, which must increase profits for their shareholders, Insurance companies have a strong incentive to deny payouts to consumers. R-67 provides an incentive for fair dealing, and might actually reduce the need for trial lawyers.
Politicians like Hague are like diapers and should be changed for the same reason. They become comfortable and corrupt.
Mak deserves thanks for great reporting. I wish we had it on the national level.
"Ben Franklin" claims that Pope's losses make him Not Qualified.
Abraham Lincoln had two business ventures fail, lost 8 different elections and had a complete nervous breakdown before becoming president in 1816.
As for issues, I think the biggest issue we face today is is lack of accountability. Pope is doing something about it.
Richard Pope has demonstrated his uncanny ability to do research by flushing out his opponents falsified records. That doesn't sound like someone that is mentally ill at all. On the contrary, his opponent cursed out our finest WSP officers while caught driving in a drunken stupor.
I'm sick of them both. Here's my proposal: http://noneforsix.blogspot.com .
If either of these people win, it is a lose-lose situation for the voters of District 6. We should send them BOTH a message that we have no faith in their leadership.
Jane Hague is disgusting with absolutely no personal integrity. I don't see how anyone could vote for such a person for anything. I would never associate with a person like her..nevermind vote for her!
POPE! For sure.
"BEN FRANKLIN" is so misinformed. Richard Pope has run for partisan office four times. When he filed for Assessor in 2003 that is all he did, he did not actively run, and the Municipal League rated him as Adequate. When Richard ran for his first three partisan offices, he did so at the urging of Republican activists, which included the Republican State Party Chair. And he took aproximatly six hundred thousand dollars from the other side, he was and still is our hero! But the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing in the Republican Party. God help us all. It is not fair to castigate someone because you were not there when the State Republican Chair asked Richard Pope to run and promised him support for the run, and did not keep his word. I know as I was there.