That Smell
Can’t you smell that smell? The smell of death… umm, well, defeat, at the very least. The stench should be overpowering tonight, that's for sure. Remember how I said the comedy had ended? Chalk that one up as a loss on my prognosticatin' scorecard. At this rate, I'll be laughing about this all the way up until November and beyond. Of course, my sense of humor is pretty twisted, so you, especially the hardcore efenants out there, might not find the whole thing nearly as comical as I do.
Tonight’s the night for the CD-22 precinct chairs to get together and decide what they should do about the disaster that has become the Congressional election. I have no doubt that the party will try to throw their support behind one of the losers who have already declared as write-ins. Effectively, that means she who must not be named since David Wallace has inspired some profound feelings amongst the precinct chairs. So they’ll rally around some poor schmoe who has no hope in hell of winning as a write-in just so they can go home comfortable and secure in the knowledge that they supported a Republican, by gum!
Now, as an avowed libertarian leaning independent, this is just ass-backwards to me. The point is not to get somebody elected who has the right party affiliation. The point is to get a person elected who will work towards policies you think are beneficial. Party affiliation is shorthand for policy, not a value in and of itself. The idea is that if someone runs as a Republican, there is a core set of ideas they’ll take into office. The same can be said about Democrats, Libertarians, and Greens. However, as we have all seen lately, party affiliation doesn’t mean squat. You can have elected party members who differ from the general party consensus on any number of issues. So really, saying someone with an R is automatically better than any other candidate is just completely ludicrous. Yet, that’s what’s going to happen.
All the CD22 apparatchiks (Sheryl Berg, Kathy Haigler, Lisa Smith, etc.) aided by the state and county party functionaries are going to push the precinct chairs into picking any Republican over the one guy who is already on the ballot against Nick Lampson (D-Redistricted). This will effectively hand the election to Lampson. You could rally behind a guy who’s on the ballot, shares your positions on many issues, and could potentially win with your support. Given that he has more commonality with the efenants than with Lampson, I’d think this would be something to consider. Hell, several prominent efenants have already endorsed him. Plus, I figure the odds are better if you try to beat a Libertarian incumbent than a Democrat incumbent in 2008. Will all of these things be brought up? I hope so. Will it make a difference? No.
There’s a plethora of sound tactical reasons to support Smithers and more than few ideological ones. However, Smithers is running with the dreaded L so he’s not gonna be a real candidate to the hardcore party loyalists. Instead, I’m betting they’ll pick one of the write-ins and get that efenant beat like a red-headed stepchild. Anybody want to take me up on that bet? I’ll even give you 2 to 1 odds.
Tonight’s the night for the CD-22 precinct chairs to get together and decide what they should do about the disaster that has become the Congressional election. I have no doubt that the party will try to throw their support behind one of the losers who have already declared as write-ins. Effectively, that means she who must not be named since David Wallace has inspired some profound feelings amongst the precinct chairs. So they’ll rally around some poor schmoe who has no hope in hell of winning as a write-in just so they can go home comfortable and secure in the knowledge that they supported a Republican, by gum!
Now, as an avowed libertarian leaning independent, this is just ass-backwards to me. The point is not to get somebody elected who has the right party affiliation. The point is to get a person elected who will work towards policies you think are beneficial. Party affiliation is shorthand for policy, not a value in and of itself. The idea is that if someone runs as a Republican, there is a core set of ideas they’ll take into office. The same can be said about Democrats, Libertarians, and Greens. However, as we have all seen lately, party affiliation doesn’t mean squat. You can have elected party members who differ from the general party consensus on any number of issues. So really, saying someone with an R is automatically better than any other candidate is just completely ludicrous. Yet, that’s what’s going to happen.
All the CD22 apparatchiks (Sheryl Berg, Kathy Haigler, Lisa Smith, etc.) aided by the state and county party functionaries are going to push the precinct chairs into picking any Republican over the one guy who is already on the ballot against Nick Lampson (D-Redistricted). This will effectively hand the election to Lampson. You could rally behind a guy who’s on the ballot, shares your positions on many issues, and could potentially win with your support. Given that he has more commonality with the efenants than with Lampson, I’d think this would be something to consider. Hell, several prominent efenants have already endorsed him. Plus, I figure the odds are better if you try to beat a Libertarian incumbent than a Democrat incumbent in 2008. Will all of these things be brought up? I hope so. Will it make a difference? No.
There’s a plethora of sound tactical reasons to support Smithers and more than few ideological ones. However, Smithers is running with the dreaded L so he’s not gonna be a real candidate to the hardcore party loyalists. Instead, I’m betting they’ll pick one of the write-ins and get that efenant beat like a red-headed stepchild. Anybody want to take me up on that bet? I’ll even give you 2 to 1 odds.
posted by T at 4:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home