Today, The Seattle Times editorial board took a third-party campaign group (The New Majority PAC) to task for what it calls a “sleazy personal attack” on Roger Goodman. Specifically, the Times identifies the sleazy attack as an allegation that Goodman drove his children while under the influence of marijuana—an accusation that surfaced during his divorce proceedings.
The Times calls the incident the “only serious allegation in this muck” and refers its readers to unsubstantiated police reports and Goodman’s own denial. To be fair to his wife (who made the allegation), emails sent from Goodman and filed with the court show that “the legislator… seemingly admits to having driven while stoned in the past but claims that he is no longer smoking marijuana.”
The Times goes on to urge voters who “see these sleazy third-party fliers plop in their mailboxes this election, toss them in the trash where they belong.” The editorial board argues that campaigns should be centered “on issues.”
While the Times is correct that elections should be centered on issues, it’s not always that simple. A candidate for public office knowingly places themselves under a public microscope. By running for PUBLIC office, they ask voters to place their trust in them. Voters cannot place their trust in elected officials without understanding some semblance of their character. That’s why candidates often parade their spouse and/or children on the campaign trail—the image of a family invokes a sense of reliability, a constancy of character to reassure the public of the candidate’s trustworthiness.
That’s why Goodman’s past behavior is significant—it reveals a lack of constancy in Goodman’s character that is disquieting. You see, the Times is wrong to call the accusation that Goodman drove his children while under the influence of marijuana the “only serious allegation” that troubles him. While the allegation is not a proven fact, it is indicative of Goodman’s past behavior—charges on his character that have, in fact, been proven and that are, in fact, quiet serious.
SHIFT previously wrote of Goodman’s perceptible pattern of lying, substantiated by a state auditor’s report that proves he broke three state laws while in a leadership position serving in a public servant capacity. Not to mention that, while possessing marijuana was still illegal by state and federal law, Goodman openly admits to possessing marijuana and engaging in “the habit.” These are proven incidents in Goodman’s past behavior which raise reasonable questions of his character—reasonable and serious questions the Times editorial board is wrong to downplay.
