| || |
October 9, 2012 - John Stack
I’m not one to tell people to get out and vote. I believe if someone has no idea of the issues or the candidates that they should refrain from voting. I do believe that if you do feel strongly one way or another, but don’t feel your vote counts, I think you need to get out and vote. Just ask Paul Herrmann who tied in an election here in town and the winner was decided by luck of the draw! I only vote when I have an idea of people in the race. Locally, I often don’t know. Some judge something or other? How would I ever know about if a judge was good or bad (unless I somehow had to go to court?). Locally, I rarely vote just party line. I’d vote for Ron Keough or Howard Riley regardless what they were running for. I’d probably vote for just about everyone who is on the Adirondack Habitat for Humanity board with me. I don’t know their political persuasions, but they are all such good people who really seem committed to a better world. What is a better reason to vote for someone? Then there are the times when I vote against people. I may not know one of the candidates, but if one candidate is out of their league, way too ideological and does not understand the issues at all and is full of bluster for all the wrong reasons, I would vote for their opponent. For instance, Janet Duprey is running again for Assembly. I like Janet, and her social outlook, even if I disagree with her fiscally. I could never vote for Karen Bisso, (see Enterprise article on side – not even knowing party affiliation, I can’t see people actually voting for a right wing uninformed nutjob like Bisso.) So if given the choice, it would be Janet. I also agree more with Duprey than David Kimmel, but there I’d more be voting for Duprey than against Kimmel. (I realize Kimmell lost theGOP Primary last month)
Then there is pragmatic voting. The Assembly race can be thought of as pragmatic. The GOP candidates were asked, being in the minority in the Assembly, should voters go for the Democrat who would seemingly carry more clout? That does make sense. Often, candidates make cases for election based upon what they can get done (makes sense), but also , what they can get done LOCALLY. They are STATE reps, but many people really look at what these people will do for the North Country. As I also like Betty Little for State Senate, and the GOP has the majority in the Senate, you could make the claim voting for her is pragmatic. Also, Betty has many years in, is on committees important to the North Country, and its not like you are voting for Karen Bisso. But, in the Duprey/Bisso race, pragmatically, who do you vote for? Typically, it’s a slam dunk for Duprey. But, this year , somehow, Bisso actually garnered about 30 percent of the vote in the GOP primary. She’s still running on the Conservative line. This may be a race like the Dede Scozzafava/Owens/Hoffman conflagration of 2009. Bisso doesn’t have to pull too many conservative votes (who would never vote for Carpenter) for the Republican vote to be split handing the 115th to a Democrat for the first time in a long time. In an irony probably lost on many, Doug Hoffmann is endorsing Bisso. So, in a span of 3 years, Hoffmann could easily be responsible for handing over a solid Republican US House seat and a solid Republican NY Assembly seat to the Democrats…
A short primer on the linked articles, and you will see why the Enterprise actually endorsed people NOT to vote for Bisso: In one, Bisso argues against teacher evaluations. Maybe she hasn’t been paying attention, but teacher evaluations are a basic tenet of the conservative party (her party) not of the Democratic party. Bisso argues that more development – ie : more jobs, broader tax base, etc is NOT what we should be for. Lowering taxes is the ONLY thing. Can’t say any politician, or and logical person, could understand that one. Lowering taxes has always been a kickstart mechanism for jobs, development, etc…not a means in itself. In another statement, she argues against schools competing for federal dollars. She is more for just handing money to school districts, regardless how they spend the money, or how much it actually helps education better. She points to the 10th amendment claiming somehow that it ‘lets individual states develop their own education systems.’ The 10th amendment says no such thing, (its about the ‘implied federal powers – and actually made more specific state rights MORE ambiguous, not less – basically the worst of all the amendments) She claims that this incentive violates that amendment. In fact, the USSC has many times ruled that the federal government CAN offer incentives, monetary and otherwise, to comply with a federal program, be it educational or cleaning up of radioactive waste.
Finally, the TrailRunners of the Frostbite Fantasy Football league are 5-0 after completing a perfect campaign against the other 5 teams in the league…
No comments posted for this article.
Post a Comment
News, Blogs & Events Web