Unusually for a neophyte, Meghan Sahli-Wells’s streaking campaign for a City Council seat continued on a directly skyward trajectory last night at the Culver City Democratic Club meeting.
In a setting that subsequently turned surreal, she lopsidedly captured the club’s only endorsement when two endorsements were available.
Unusually for an incumbent who is visible and vocal the year around, Councilman Scott Malsin once again was frustrated at a Candidates Forum.
With malice aforethought, the pliable overflow crowd in the Rotunda Room of the Vets Auditorium aimed its coldest shoulder toward him. Apparently the overwhelming rejection was payback for policy decisions the past four years and for his perceived aloof attitude on the dais.
With Election Day still two months off, Mr. Malsin has been unable to gain traction for his ostensibly front-running campaign.
What could have been a triumphant outing for middling candidate Jeff Cooper bizarrely fizzled.
In what some observers characterized as a manipulated fit of pique, while Mr. Cooper plainly was the second choice of voters, he was denied an endorsement feather he was close to earning.
If Election Day plays out as weirdly as the Democratic Club’s conduct last night, they will be investigating the outcome until President McKinley returns to or from the dead.
Here is what happened:
The four candidates for two City Council seats — including Robert Zirgulis, who was nearly shut out — gave introductory orations that, by now, are becoming shopworn.
With varying degrees of success, imagination and unevenness, the lady and gentlemen answered eight sturdy questions entertainingly posed by club President Ronnie Jayne.
Then they were shooed out of the room for the endorsement voting process.
In the wake of what seemed to be impressively hard-nosed lobbying, Ms. Sahli-Wells won the club’s endorsement on a vote so onesided that the room tilted.
With 77 persons in the standing-room crowd voting, Ms. Sahli-Wells, whose grassroots credentials and liberal philosophy are tailor-made for the club, was named on 64. Somewhere off on the next planet were Mr. Cooper with 24, Mr. Malsin with 13 and Mr. Zirgulis with 3.
Club rules call for a second round if the available endorsement slots are not filled in the opening voting.
Before the balloting resumed, two speakers implored the audience to reject the bottom three and, instead, vote No Endorsement, a novel but not new idea. Many obviously already had been convinced to stage a boycott because No Endorsement handily won.
Half of the audience, 32, voted to snub the bottom three. But Mr. Cooper’s supporters stayed true, and he was named on 23 ballots. Mr. Malsin dropped from 13 to 10 votes, and Mr. Zirgulis from 3 to 1.
When the vote count was announced , a personality not involved with any of the campaigns cracked:
“I haven’t seen a deck that stacked since James Garner was ‘Maverick.’”
The maneuver powerfully benefits Ms. Sahli-Wells.
When the Democratic Club sends out thousands of mailers this spring, she will receive the exclusive, and not shared, billing. That may be crucial with a relatively small number of ballots deciding the Council races.
How did the candidates fare otherwise?
Mr. Cooper: Like an entertainer on television nightly, he needs new material. The great-town chamber of commerce introductory speech is problematically thin to begin with. After a dozen airings, the audience’s lips are moving — and their spirit no longer is. His enthusiastic congeniality is a winner because it is authentic. But if he doesn’t freshen and fatten up the contents, personality may not be enough.
Mr. Malsin: It is too early to go to the couch, but not too early to be genuinely concerned. Scrapping his script reading that bogged him down at the last candidates forum, stylistically he made a commendable turnaround against the Democrats. But it was not nearly enough of a change. Club members seemed anxious to punish him for votes he has made — it doesn’t take many of them or an overwhelming amount of evidence. What is arguably his core problem is esoteric and overcomeable. Unusually for a small town, the crowd just did not like this candidate. He could have distributed money to the whole audience and still lost the vote. For a politician in his prime, a personality adjustment may be his toughest chore between now and April 13.
Ms. Sahli-Wells: Like a virtuoso, she hit every correct note with this decidedly liberal, decidedly older crowd. On this night, though, that said more about the audience than the candidate. She is plenty good enough to win one of the seats, but she has considerable tightening up ahead. She has the foundation, an appealing personality that connects with her listeners. But she needs a firmer, clearer command of the issues — what they are, with precision. She needs to more strongly define her views. Time may be her best friend on the final matter. With all other requirements almost in place, she needs to overcome her nervousness.
Mr. Zirgulis: His main problem is that he possesses more potential than credibility at the present. If he is to succeed, it lies closer to the future than the present. The quintessential unorthodox candidate, he needs to merely fine-tune his message but massively re-tool his style. Too often, it is off-putting. In private life, he is a serious person. But something not good happens when he stands before a crowd. He needs to calm down, to stop treating his campaign like a warmup act. His only chance to be taken seriously is to overcome those gaping weaknesses.
