Meet Ron Weigelt! He has an awesome mustache, and he's the Democrat running in this year's election against Pam Roach, the Republican state senator who represents the 31st district!

Pam Roach has been in the state legislature since 1991, reappearing on the ballot every couple years like an infestation of roaches—that is, if roaches threw tantrums over flowers, got banned from their own party's caucus, and were instructed to get anger-management counseling by their peers.

Weigelt has a history of fighting Roachs. In 2008, Weigelt ran against Dan Roach (Pam's son) and lost, with 39.9 percent of the vote, despite endorsements from the Sierra Club and multiple labor unions. And he'll likely face greater challenges trying to squash Mom Roach this year. She has raised $24,915, according to Washington State Public Disclosure Commission records, including contributions from Chevron, Philip Morris and Wal-Mart. Weitgelt has only reported $7,811, and most of that is in personal expenditures--i.e., most of his money has come out of his own pocket.

When asked how he plans to beat Roach, he told me, "I need at least $100,000, and maybe more, depending on what she raises." His ground strategy relies on doorbelling, phone banks, mailings to tell voters about "Pam Roach's behavior, and how it's ineffective." He says, "negative campaigning is when you say things that aren't true, and I'm not going to do that."

True, nothing need be invented about Roach to make her seem like a liability to the district and party.

But therein lies the question: Is it better to let Pam Roach win? She may be the greatest detriment to Republicans in the state. And her district, apparently, thinks that their gun-wielding, screaming-machine senator is doing a swell job. As long as she doesn't shoot, liberals should want to keep Roach in there—she's the best thing that ever happened to Democrats in Olympia.

EXTRA: Since his website doesn't really talk about his issues—other than Roach sucking—I asked Weigelt about some liberal bellwether issues. His answers are after the jump.

On Gay Marriage

"I don't like the term 'marriage,' quite honestly, and that seems to be true to my district" said Weigelt. I'm used to hearing this - and, I mean, fuck that, but I remind myself that this is at least better than Pam Roach. He goes on to say, "I'm supportive of any kind of domestic partnership, and anything to give them the same rights as 'married' people... [a same-sex couple] doesn't love each other any less than a heterosexual couple."

On Abortion:

"I think that if you ask a woman that’s had one she will tell you it was a very difficult decision, but I think it’s that woman’s decision to make." Score one for Weigelt! He says he wants safe, legal abortion! He added that he thinks it's ironic that pro-lifers tend to want less government, but "when it gets as personal as that, they want the government to be involved, and I don’t."

On Marijuana Reform:

"Maybe some small amount could be decriminalized so we don’t waste our time," he said, worrying that decriminalizing 40 grams seemed like "an awful lot." "[State Representative Chris Hurst] had some good arguments as to why we shouldn’t decriminalize it.... but I think it’s a resource issue."

Okay, he could be better—but he's gay-tolerant, at least, he's spot-on with abortion, he's for at least some degree of marijuana reform, and the Sierra Club endorsed him in 2008 for his views on the environment and transit. Maybe he'll get a wizard sidekick or something?

... Probably not.