Tag: campaigns

Campaign Week

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I have spent months gathering information and studying candidates and issues as well as learning about my precinct since I didn’t live here until just after the caucus meetings two years ago. I have talked to a number of my neighbors although I have tried not to overwhelm anyone with my interest in politics. Now we come down to the final week before our precinct caucus meeting and hopefully a week from today I will be, as one person succinctly described it, “every candidate’s best friend.” In other words, a state delegate in the Republican party.

Now is the time to more actively campaign among my neighbors and let them get to know more about my political interests than could be displayed within the limitations of a caucus meeting. In addition to sharing reminders about the caucus meeting that would inform people about my intent to seek a state delegate position, I’m thinking about holding a small pre-caucus meeting where people in the neighborhood could come talk together about issues.

Anyone have any thoughts about such an idea?

Tags 2010, campaigns

State

Meet the Candidates

Ben Horsley, a friend and candidate for House District 19 this year, put together a meet the candidates event as part of his campaign on Saturday at Bountiful City Hall. This was not a chance to meet the candidates for District 19 (where I don’t live anyway but if I did I’d be voting for him) but the candidates for U.S. Senate. It included all the Republican Candidates as well as other political figures in Utah (most prominently Rob Bishop and Mark Shurtleff). Although I have been interested in this race for over a year and thus have been closely studying the candidates for a long time I had not previously met Tim Bridgewater or James Williams – I could hardly pass up such a great opportunity right in my own back yard (so to speak). Thanks Ben!

Having studied the candidate previously I had some idea of my order of preference, but I really enjoyed this debate as it allowed me to really get things sorted out. Here’s my order of preference:

1. Mike Lee – I don’t think that surprises anyone considering I already publicly endorsed him but after hearing him with all the other candidates together I am that much more confident that he should be our Senator come next year.

2. Tim Bridgewater – I really like Tim overall. I think he’d make a decent senator – I just think that Mike would be better at filling the Constitutional duties of a senator.

3. (tie) Laura Bridgewater – she sat in for her husband for the first bit of the debate as he was running late and she had a good grasp of what our next senator should be and do – she’d be a great support to Tim if he were elected.

3. (tie) Sharon Lee – I’ve heard her speak before and believe she is a good support for Mike. I hadn’t thought to rank her among the candidates until I saw Mrs. Bridgewater in her husband’s place among the candidates but I think either of those two spouses would be better than the other candidates.

5. (tie) Bob Bennett – Despite his failings Bennett is not the worst choice available to us in this campaign. Like a typical Washington insider he is so busy viewing everything as “extremely complicated” that he seems to have lost sight of most of the simple facts that should be informing our complicated decisions.

5. (tie) James Williams – I had high hopes for James. I had heard really good things about him from people attending other debates, but after listening to him I am forced to conclude that he is a good and well-intentioned man who is out of his depth politically. Philosophically he has good principles, but I don’t believe that he would be an effective force at representing those principles or the people of Utah.

7. Cherilyn Eagar – I remember being excited about the possibilities when I started investigating her as a candidate, but seeing her in a debate showed her as combative, passionate, and disrespectful. If I wanted someone like that there must be 20 other states I could move to where I would have two such Senators in place already. She argues that having a conservative woman in the Senate would be a powerful thing – I’m sure that’s true, but I’ve already named two other conservative women from Utah who would make better senators.

Tags 2010, Ben Horsley, Bob Bennett, campaigns, Cherilyn Eagar, House 19, James Williams, Mike Lee, senate, Tim Bridgewater

life Local

Mike Lee and the Constitution

Post author By David
Post date January 13, 2010
17 Comments on Mike Lee and the Constitution

I have been having a hard time getting the time to read and write here as much as I would like. Things are very busy at work, a bit crazy at home, and I am spending more time with offline political activities in preparation for the upcoming legislative session and this election cycle. The result is that I need to readjust my expectations here. I’ll try to put short posts up with some regularity, but not likely as much as has previously been the case. Hopefully this is only temporary.

Because of the recent discussion here about Mike Lee’s stance on the Constitution and his call for a couple of amendments I thought it would be appropriate to share Mike’s post – Why I Focus on the Constitution. I figure it’s always best to let people speak for themselves so here is what I see as the heart of what he wrote:

We must analyze the country’s current challenges and Congress’s proposed solutions through the lens of the Constitution. With such a view, we can accurately determine if the proposed solution incorporates and supports the proper role of government. We must also hold our elected officials accountable to the solemn oaths they have taken to support and defend this document. . . With truly committed constitutional leaders at the helm, we can shift away from a perpetually growing government and the corresponding loss of personal liberty, and instead preserve our freedoms and enjoy the prosperity our great nation affords.

I recommend that anyone who wants to understand Mike and his position in more detail should go read his whole post before trying to engage me in the topic because I don’t claim to know any more about Mike’s position than what he wrote.

Tags 2010, campaigns, civic participation, connections, Mike Lee

life

The Goal of My Political Activity

Post author By David
Post date December 9, 2009
7 Comments on The Goal of My Political Activity

Last month, in response to a comment that:

more often than not it seems the only choice we have in our candidates is a choice between horrible and horrible.

I wrote back saying:

That means that you need to get in earlier in the process – before there are only two candidates left – because I agree that neither hanging nor the firing squad sound very appealing. Of course it’s possible to have more than two candidates and still have nobody who does not look like either a gallows, a firing squad, or a lethal injection chamber. . . In such cases we have to work as voters to encourage better candidates to get in the race. Long term we even have the option to plan ahead and run for office ourselves if we consistently cannot get decent choices. (emphasis added)

My goal in politics is to help illuminate current issues with timeless principles so that I and other will be able to recognize and support (and become when necessary) the kind of high quality candidates that are required to put this country back on the solid footing that it once enjoyed.

As my wife can attest, I am absolutely serious about that last part. Having seen many candidates for important office that I felt were unable to act as the kind of legislator that I am looking for, I have had many discussions publicly and privately about running for various offices. Last night I was talking to my wife about this and I finally was able to state my political goals succinctly – my goal generally is to put myself in a position where I can run for any office where there is no acceptable candidate and my goal for any given race is to find a good candidate that I can support – using myself as the candidate of last resort.

I would consider myself extremely successful politically if I always found solid candidates to support and never felt the need to run myself – especially if the candidates I supported won in most cases. Despite that definition of success I am preparing so that if I ever find myself unable to identify a quality candidate I can and will step in and run an effective campaign with a better than average chance of winning. (Evidence of my preparing is that I already own a campaign domain that I can use anytime I find it necessary to run and as I have time available I am working on developing that site in advance so that all I have to do is develop some graphics and campaign/office specific material in order to launch an effective campaign.)

Tags campaigns, civic participation, goals

General

Legislator as Fundraiser

When it comes to raising money to run a campaign an ideal legislator needs to understand the real value of money in politics. They need to accept that a serious campaign will require more money than they can personally supply (unless they have significant personal wealth). They need to be comfortable asking people to support them financially – that requires not only being comfortable making the request, but also confident in the message they are promoting in their campaign. On the other hand, an ideal legislator should never fall into the trap of thinking that money can overcome the absolute necessity for them to be putting in hard work on the ground making their case among the people who will be casting their votes.

Here is where I know some people will disagree with me. I contend that a campaign even for federal offices can be financed entirely through personal donations by people residing within the jurisdiction of the office being sought. Contributions from businesses should be refused. Businesses and industries that are part of the district for the office being sought should make any desired contributions through the individuals within those companies. Money from Political Action Committees should not be given to specific candidates. Committees that wish to help a candidate should spend their own money in whatever way they feel will best help the candidate without the candidate ever receiving any money from them. “Abc PAC” can endorse a candidate, can buy booths saying they support that candidate, can make and distribute literature and other advertising materials for the candidate, but should not write a check to the candidate. Anything they produce should never have the candidate saying that they approved the message – in other words, the PAC and the candidate should be independent of each other with full right to voice their support of the efforts of the other.

Personally I would prefer that a candidate never run a campaign on debt although I am not ready to say that I could never support a candidate that uses debt to help finance their campaign. I would say that no good candidate should ever carry debt from one campaign to another. If they have not paid off their expenses from a previous campaign (for the same office or another office) they should not be running a new campaign.

I know that there are people who would argue that this ideal is not feasible in our current political environment and I am open to thoughts on what can and should be done, but please don’t just shoot down my ideal without explaining why we should not desire it.

Tags campaign promises, campaigns, change congress, ideal, money

General

Legislator as Candidate

My experience with many campaigns – especially for any office higher than state legislator – is that the majority of them spend their time talking about a) the fact that they need your money to run the campaign, and b) the fact that whoever they are running against is not the right person for the job. Few of them talk about the seat they are trying to fill, or the issues that are relevant to that position.

All the time spent soliciting money is time not spent promoting the candidate. It is universally understood that campaigns need funding and the candidates do have to mention that at times, but when that is the primary focus of the campaign it indicates a shallowness of purpose that seems to degrade the office they are seeking. Requests for donations should always be the sideshow of the campaign message.

Secondly, I have no reason to trust what Candidate A says about Candidate B unless I have already chosen to support Candidate A – in which case Candidate A is probably wasting time preaching to the choir.

A good legislator should not be spending their time running against an opponent, they should be running for a position. This does not mean that they cannot say anything against their opponent(s) but whatever they say against another candidate should demonstrate why the criticism is relevant to the office they are seeking. This same principle applies to what a candidate says about themselves. It doesn’t matter if a candidate bases their positive platform on “I’m a Republican” or “I’m a Democrat” or “I’m an Independent” or “I’m pragmatic” or “I’m experienced” in all cases what they say should be reinforced with evidence of why what they are (or claim to be) is relevant to the position they are seeking.

If the platform or message of the campaign revolves around anything other than the position they are seeking (even if it revolves around the Constitution) then the message of the campaign is distracting from the purpose that should be driving the decisions of the voters.

Tags campaigns, ideal, message, money

General

Legislator as Campaign Strategist

Post author By David
Post date September 28, 2009
No Comments on Legislator as Campaign Strategist

I had thought to cover the ideal candidacy of a good legislator in a single post but it has become obvious to me that there is just too much to cover in one sitting. On top of that, the campaign is arguably the aspect of being a good legislator where candidates – whether they end up winning or losing – stray from what a good legislator should do.

From a campaign strategy perspective the most important thing that a good legislator should do is understand the system that they are to be working in. I saw what I thought was a good example of this in the Jason Chaffetz campaign for Utah’s 3rd District congressional seat in 2008. For the sake of clarity I would like to say that I was not part of the campaign nor do I live in the 3rd district – I am simply an outside observer who happens to share the same party affiliation.

My observations were of a campaign where they understood the Utah Republican Party rules to receive the nomination and they focused their efforts on getting that nomination. As far as I could see goals of fund-raising were completely secondary to goals or raising support among those who would actually be casting the votes for the Republican nominee in the district – first the state delegates, and then the members of the Republican party when he fell just shy of averting the need for a primary race against Rep. Cannon. Again from my outsider perspective it appears that all other goals were designed and pursued only as a means of reaching and persuading those who would actually be casting the votes. Contrary to what seems to be the conventional wisdom, there is more to it than raising large amounts of money and buying up as much advertising as possible – as proven by the fact that Chaffetz was significantly outspent by Cannon.

The reason that a legislator needs to be a good strategist with a solid understanding of the system is not simply so that they can get elected, but also because those skills are important in working within the legislative body to which they are seeking membership. Again from my outsiders perspective Rep. Chaffetz appears to demonstrate this by the fact that he has been able to garner more attention and influence than I would have expected to see in a freshman congressman in the minority party of the House.

Tags campaigns, change congress, ideal, thoughts

State

One Party State

Most people are probably not yet aware that the state legislature is in session yet and already our unbalanced government is drawing flack from both sides of the political spectrum. From the left we get complaints about a task force to study merit pay for teachers. I like the idea of merit pay, but the task force being proposed is highly questionable as it is overwhelmingly composed of legislators rather than educators and citizens. It goes so far as to pay the legislators on the task force, but not the other members of the task force. It is so loaded with legislators that if they were to split the legislators proportional to the makeup of the legislature they would have 9 Republican legislators and one (likely Republican) governor’s designee who can simply dictate the outcome of the study against the other 3 Democratic legislators and 6 professional educators – this assumes that they put 3 Democrats on the task force – which is not guaranteed.

From the right we have complaints that our state laws governing the use of campaign funds are too lax. It seems like the simplest of common sense that campaign donations should not be used on other campaigns or for personal use unrelated to active campaigning. It’s nice that we have laws to require full disclosure of any gift over $50, but that’s no excuse to allow campaigning to be used as a source of personal income.

You really should visit the original articles to get the full extent of both issues. Nice start to the political year.

Tags campaigns, money, Utah