Humboldtian

John has considerable name recognition and goodwill among 3rd district voters. John has been on the scene and active since the 1970's.

John's unwillingness to seriously consider rail banking for NCRA routes seriously dents his reputation in the 3rd, in my opinion. This will especially hurt him among newer progressive voters in the 3rd who evaluate John based on recent (ie, last 10 or 15 years) rather than ancient (ie, late 1960's - 1970's activism).

I wouldn't put John quite in the same box as Ollivier, but the two are a lot closer than one would have thought a few years ago.

While I don't think a conservative has much of a chance in the 3rd, if an, ahem, modern progressive, were to enter the race who has substantial name recognition and recent street cred, John could lose.

Thanks for your considered comment, Steve. With John's length of service, high name recognition and overall political clout, I'm not sure the railroad issue alone is enough to derail his quest to seek another term.

The Higgins landside aside, there is still a large segment of the voting population behind the railroad, in my opinion.

Andy, how come your comments are posted in reverse order? It's odd to have to scroll down to read the post and then start from the bottom up to read the comments.

I fixed it, Heraldo. I thought I had done this yesterday. There is a big learning curve on this particular blog program.

Thanks, that's better.

"The Higgins landside aside, there is still a large segment of the voting population behind the railroad, in my opinion."

I'm not sure where that "large segment" lives. Remember Mike Wilson ran on a similar trails (skeptical of rail) platform as Higgins in the same district as Woolley. He won 60% of the vote against an established and liked incumbent.

Thanks for your comment, Anon 3:04. This is a subject for a blog entry in itself. I assume most conservatives in Humboldt County support the return of the railroad. But there is a split among the "progressives" over the railroad. Peter La Vallee for instance, like Woolley, is a staunch supporter of the railroad. I know a lot of people who support progressive politics who want the railroad to return.

Hi again, Andrew et al:

The division among Humboldt progressives about rail vs. trail is interesting, though such divisions are nothing unusual. Folks on the left side of the political spectrum don't seem to herd very well.

In my day-to-day experience, the view up on campus at HSU is very pro-trail. Most folks seem to understand that Humboldt is very unlikely to find a sugar daddy willing to drop hundreds of millions on what might be called "the rail to nowhere."

In the years I've lived in the 3rd Sup. District, the HSU/Arcata perspective has tended to dominate the vote in the 3rd.

One's subjective sense of "what people think" on an issue tends to reflect what we hear from the folks we interact with.

One's subjective sense of "what people think" on an issue tends to reflect what we hear from the folks we interact with.

True that. But I do interact with a lot of people
who don't support the railroad as well.

Conservatives are not as supportive of the rail as you might think. Most think it is a Democratic boondoggle.

"Supporting" the rail and not believing that it is going to happen in the foreseeable future are two different things. You can do both, and still think that a trail is a good thing in the mean time.

Lots of fuel to use on Wooley. Mostranski will come out hard right away and make it an "issue" campaign. Look out.

John Woolley is viewed locally as an establishment Democrat. Mostranski should beat up on Woolley, but will it win him the supervisor seat? The 3rd District will not elect a Republican like Mostranski to the Board of Supervisors.

A non "establishment" progressive would have a chance. That is how Woolley's generation came to power.