Friday, January 2, 2009

Local State Senate and Delegate races

While the gubernatorial primary is starting to gain momentum, we should start focusing on our local State Senate and State Delegate races.

Local conservative blogger, Alton Foley, posts that Democratic Minority Leader Ward Armstrong is about to get a Republican challenger (announcement forthcoming apparently) and Del. Don Merricks is currently unopposed, without a Democratic challenger.

What have you heard? What do you know? Who would you like to see run against Delegates Merricks (R-Chatham), Marshall (R-Danville), and Poindexter (R-Franklin County)? Consider this an open thread on the subject.

7 comments:

Alton Foley said...

umm.
That should be Merricks (R-Chatham)...

Drew said...

Corrected. Thanks!

Alton Foley said...

You're most certainly welcome.

Alton Foley said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Billy Jack said...

Drew,
Great start on the blog.
However, shouldn't the question be posed: what is insufficient about these candidates or their performance to warrant opposition?
Let's not just run a Democrat to run a Democrat. Of course, this all applies to the Republicans and those few Independents too.

Drew said...

Great question, Billy Jack.

I agree, having a strong candidate - where he/she can make a strong case for their candidacy over and against the incumbent - is better than having a candidate for the sake of having a candidate. But I wonder in the latter case, isn't competition - in an election sense - a good thing for voters? It keeps the representatives on their toes, and it holds them responsible and accountable to the needs and desires of their constituents. While a strong competition is always the ideal case, I think a good case can be made that even a lower level of competition is better to voters than no competition at all. I mean we generally see primaries as a good thing, even for incumbents, especially in light of the recent presidential Democratic primary.

Am I right? Does that even make sense? Better yet, does that answer your question?

Billy Jack said...

Thanks for your perspective.
However, primaries (and conventions) are generally not seen as positive occurences. One reason I am no longer with the Democratic Party is its distaste for my dissent. A Democratic primary challenger against Roscoe or Ward would be frowned upon by the big wigs. What the people desire doesn't matter to them.

However, we then must confront that problem: what the people desire isn't always what's best for them. Politics, as revealed by the failed Bush Administration, does not reveal one's ability to govern. You may win election or reelection, but be atrocious in office. I don't know about Poindexter because I have had little to do with him. Personally, I like Marshall and Merricks. Merricks is a nice guy, but needs a good advisor to keep him away from his rookie mistakes.

Do I agree with them all the time? No.
Do I know they believe they are doing the right thing? Yes
Are they honest and upfront with me? Yes.
Is much of their opposition based on R or D? Yes

Can I say that of the local Democratic officials? No, I've known them for years; they are none of these things.

I am more interested in people-oriented candidates, especially against Roscoe or Ward, whether they be true blue Democrats or Republicans that "get it." Unfortunately, I know the Democrats won't allow it and fear that the Republicans won't either.

The Good Ol' Boys Club of this community must be demolished. I hope that you agree. Thanks for your time.