Hey, Sally, don’t let those abusive comments about your appeal to reason bother you. It’s pretty much par for the course these days, particularly if you ask people to rise above factionalism.
You’ve been out of the political sphere for awhile — as you say, teachers are so wrapped up in the day-to-day practical matter of education that they tend not to follow this stuff too closely.
Anyway, in the last few years, partisanship has more or less driven the country mad. Pragmatic, good-faith observations such as yours are actually beyond the understanding of most people who take an active interest in political matters.
If they call themselves Republicans, or conservatives, they will accuse you of trying to — how was it Lee put it? — "sabotage the Republican primary." Imagine that. People so far gone in the partisan game that picking up a Republican ballot in order to vote for the BEST CANDIDATE, the one you honestly would prefer to see win, is seen as "sabotage."
If they call themselves Democrats, or liberals (excuse me, they don’t use that outside Nancy Pelosi’s district; let’s say "progressives"), they’ll have a fit because you dare to suggest that anyone who MIGHT otherwise vote Democratic should vote Republican — even though that is obviously the thing to do if you truly want to advance public education, which Democrats SAY they care about.
Forget about superintendent of education for a moment; forget about governor, for that matter. Forget even about public education. Anyone who cares about good, straightforward, honest government — for that matter, anyone who believes that South Carolinians ought to determine the course of their state, rather than moneyed ideological outsiders who don’t even know anything about our state — should grab a Republican ballot if they live in the House district of one of the Republicans that these unpricipled groups are targeting.
If you didn’t get it the first time, go back and read Cindi Scoppe’s column on the subject. And if you still don’t get it, read it again. Follow the links. THINK. These honest people — including the one member of the House to vote against this budget every step of the way — are being attacked in generic mailings as "big spenders." Why is that? Because the outsider’s true agenda — attacking every Republican who took a stand against tax credits for private schools — doesn’t play well.
THINK. Whatever partisan label you choose, or if you don’t choose a label (and if you don’t, God bless you for it) THINK about what these people are trying to do. Think about how stupid they think you are, and how much money they’re betting that they’re right about you.
And then go back and read what Sally wrote.
By the way, one added thought: Note that I refer to people who "call themselves" Republicans or Democrats, or "choose a label." I say that because in South Carolina, no one is a registered member of any party. It’s amazing how many people don’t know that. If you don’t believe me, check your voter registration card.
Every time you go to vote in a primary, you get to choose. Next primary, you can vote in the opposite party. Next time, you can vote in the first one again. It doesn’t matter. In this state, you are actually free to vote as you choose.
Almost. There are two restrictions, and I really wish they didn’t exist, either. First, you have to vote in one or the other primary in a given election. Second, you can only vote in the runoff of the primary you voted in. (Actually, that’s another reason the Republican primary vote should be relatively huge this time: You choose a Democratic ballot on June 13, and then you look at the critical choices remaining to be made in the Republican runoff on June 27, and you’re out of luck. You’re disenfranchised. Think about it: Are there any Democratic contests with enough viable candidates to have a runoff? Not in any races I’ve been following. But there are certainly going to be some GOP runoffs, and the contrasts between the remaining candidates in those are likely to be stark.)
Now see, I’ve just set off the partisans again. They are OUTRAGED that I imply you should be allowed to vote in BOTH parties’ primaries on a given day. You bet. I’m sick and tired of what I as an independent am left with in the way of choices come November. I’m sick of having to decide whether it’s more important to have a say in this primary or the other one. For once, I’d like to get to vote for having TWO good candidates in the general election. I’d like to have a choice in the fall between good and better, rather than bad and worse.
Moreover, any reasonable person is likely to care about a Democrat winning in the primary for one office, and a Republican in another contest on the same day. Basically, this system condemns said reasonable person to being disenfranchised, either for (say) governor or superintendent.
The thing that makes it easy for a reasonable person such as Sally to choose Republican over Democratic this time is that the candidates for governor aren’t that terribly different on the issue that is of overriding importance to her. So she can leave that alone. The momentous decision on education will be made on the Republican ballot.
Related Posts
I wouldn’t have a problem with people voting in the Republican primary if they also planned to vote for the same person in the general election. If a person votes in the Republican primary simply to prevent a certain Republican candidate from winning and then goes ahead and votes for a Democrat in the general election, that falls somewhere between unethical and fraudulent in my book. That appears to be what Sally Huguley is advocating.
What will be your next scheme for trying to influence the election when Karen Floyd wins the primary?
See, only a partisan would say that.
What do you do if you have no idea how you’ll vote in November, but you have a definite preference between two candidates in one of the primaries now?
That’s my situation in the superintendent case. As I wrote before, I don’t know know anything about Jim Rex (in fact, until that e-mail forced me to actually type it in response, I would have had trouble telling you his name); I haven’t had time to pay any attention to anybody who’s not opposed in a primary. I don’t know whether I’d like him or not. Even if I had been studying him with the scrutiny that the five candidates on the GOP side have demanded, I wouldn’t trust my judgment on him now. He’s totally untested. I learn from the things that candidates in competition say and do. Let’s see how Mr. Rex performs between now and November, and how he reacts to various situations that arise in the campaign — no matter who his opponent is. Then I’ll know what I think of him.
How on Earth — unless I’m a partisan — could I know whether I would support this complete unknown as opposed to one of these candidates I’ve studied and studied?
C’mon Brad… you’re going to have to do better than that. Are you saying that all these Democrats that you and Ms. Huguley are asking to vote against Karen Floyd are all in the same conflicted state as you are? Gimme a break! Your scheme is to try and keep Karen Floyd from winning the primary. That’s it. You want Democrats to vote for Staton based on a single factor – that you don’t like Floyd’s stand on vouchers. Once the primary is over, what percentage of the Democrats do you think would still vote for Staton? The Sec. of
Education position is the last hope for the Democrats to retain any semblance of relevance in SC politics.
I want to make sure I have this right. You want Democrats to not bother trying to learn about Jim Rex until after the primary and instead simply cast their ballot for Republican Staton based on your recommendation and without doing any further analysis into any of his other positions? That’s what I’m reading…
I’m not partisan. I think the only Republicans I have voted for in 15 years were Sanford, McCain, and Steve Forbes.
I just think The State’s attempts to influence the election are both unethical and futile.
Brad, if the GOP strategists put a pro-voucher shill candidate on the Dem ballot and then promoted crossover so that person would weaken their strongest candidate, you and Cindy would take that candidate apart molecule by molecule in the paper. Can you deny that?
If the newspaper wants a voting crusade, how about helping fight the rampant fraud in elections, especially among Democrats, who vote twice, vote under the names of others, vote in multiple districts, vote when they are illegal aliens, etc?
Until you get serious about cleaning up the elections, don’t lecture anyone about how important it is to vote.
Doug, that’s an interesting combination — Sanford, McCain and Steve Forbes.
McCain is my hero, my absolute favorite person on the national scene. What he has to do with Sanford and Forbes I don’t know. Forbes I would never have voted for, and I’m pretty fed up with Sanford at the moment.
Apparently, I’ve voted for a LOT more Republicans than you have. Like many, many times as many.
On the other subject, I will repeat the point that both Sally and I have made: It’s not a matter of how “conflicted” those teachers are (a group that would include Democrats, Republicans and Independents); it’s a matter of how uninformed they are if they can’t tell that the place where the critical conversation about the future of education is taking place is in the Republican primary. And Sally, the teacher, is the one who’s saying they’re not paying enough attention to politics. I’m just saying I believe her.
I am not “conflicted” about November; I have no thoughts about it at all. Even though all our endorsements are done, my main struggle right now is to do what I have to do through Tuesday, and then through the runoffs.
Then I have to jump on a whole lot of projects that I’ve been putting off during this insane time of both primaries and the legislative wrapup. That includes a considerable makeover for the editorial presence on thestate.com, and a bewildering array of managerial details connected with McClatchy assuming ownership of this newspaper. (Fortunately, I will not personally have to deal with many of those details, but as an officer of the newspaper I’ll have to sit in a lot of meetings and participate in discussion about them before the business-side folks do the actual work.) I saw a confidential memo the other day just listing with the enormously complicated decisions that have to be made (how everyone’s benefits will be affected is just one of dozens as tricky as that), and it’s pretty overwhelming.
Then I’ll take a little time off before the summer is over. And THEN, when Labor Day is behind us, I’ll start really focusing on the difference between candidates in the general election.
I hope I’ll get to talk to some of those who didn’t have primary opposition before then, but I won’t be trying to make decisions before Labor Day. And probably not until October.
Oh, by the way, there is one regular of this blog (at least, he WAS a regular; we haven’t heard from him since May 3) who knows a little more than I do about Jim Rex. I just discovered that. I was wondering what had happened to Paul DeMarco, so I did a search, and saw a comment he had dutifully posted back here, reporting on the down-ballot candidates that I did not hear at the Galivants Ferry Stump. Paul was impressed with him, and Paul’s a smart guy. I don’t know if that means I’ll like him or not.
Doug, Thomas Jefferson stated that if he were given the choice to have newspapers or government, he’d take the newspaper. It’s the foundation for a free society.
Brad and The State make it their business to filter through lots of information about government, politics, and candidates and draw a reasonable conclusion to present to society. Brad is a societal watch-dog that barks alot. It’s then up to us to determine if he’s barking for a good reason or not. Both sides have wanted to put a muzzle on him which indicates to me that he’s not too partisan.
I hardly find the effort to offer up opinions to be unethical attempts to sway the public to his personal agenda. The only time I’ve seen him use his position for personal gain is when he kept asking Floyd questions during the debate so he could look at her legs.
Woof. Woof, woof. (That’s my watchdog sound, as Oddball would say.)
I think you folks at home had a better angle on Mrs. Floyd’s pins than I did, and you should all be ashamed.
That wasn’t nearly as distracting as a certain aide who came along with some legislators to an editorial board meeting a while back. She was wearing a very short black leather miniskirt with no hose, and she didn’t need any. There were enough people in the room that I thought introductions were in order, and I was looking around naming people, and when I got to her, and saw what she was wearing (she was seated, not at the table, but at a sofa along the wall), my brain turned off for a few seconds. She, thinking I had forgotten her name, introduced herself. As soon as I had rebooted, I thought “I know that,” but all I said was, “Yes, of course.” I think my English genes kick in at moments like that, and I retreat into acting all diffident and understated.
Steve Forbes ran basically on one topic – a flat tax to replace the current income tax.
I will support every candidate who pledges to destroy the IRS as we know it.
As a tax attorney told me long ago, “Income taxes are not about collecting money the government needs. The government just has to come up with ways spend money, so they can collect enough money to keep the mass of people on a treadmill, and have an enforcement agency which can be used to intimidate any serious dissent.”
Brad, when you are looking at a car, always check the headlights, forget the wheels. Beep beep, beep beep, yeaaaaaaaaaa.
Democrats Push Ban on Third Party Candidates
HR 4694 (“Let the People Decide Clean Campaign Act”) would grant full public funding to nominees of parties (ie, Democrats and Republicans)… outlaw use of private funds and donations by third party and independent candidates.
http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2006_02_09.shtml
Labor Department study says an educated workforce is not needed.
7 of 10 jobs will be low-skill and low-pay, with no need for education beyond high school. Millions of Mexican “guest workers” will take most of those jobs.
Many higher-skilled jobs will be outsourced overseas, or filled with lower-paid temporary foreign workers.
http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/archives/K/0/pub0353.html