Tag Archives: election

That’s debatable…

Posted on by

So the first presidential debate of 2012 is supposed to be held on Wednesday night. I’ll be tuned in for much the same reason that people watch auto racing… in the hope that someone screws up and generates a wreck of historic proportions. Let’s face it, if you’re the kind of person who watches televised presidential debates, there’s a pretty good chance that you already know who’s getting your vote and the best you can hope for is the other guy might just flub a line and commit electoral suicide right there on the stage. It doesn’t happen often when you get to this level, but when they do, watching a presidential candidate self destruct on live television is absolutely something to see… assuming of course that it’s not your candidate who’s doing the imploding.

More than likely nothing that dramatic will happen Wednesday night. At best we might get some zingers and traded barbs. At worst neither of the candidates will stray from the talking points that they spent three days rehearsing before the big show. In that case, the debate is just the nationally televised beauty contest catering to our collective short attention span. They set the bar that low because it’s what we’ve come to expect from our presidential debates… and that’s the pity.

Once upon a time in America, men with big ideas stood toe-to-toe with one another explaining their beliefs and position before asking the people for their vote. They actually talked about an issue based on its relative merits rather than on fine tuned, ready for television sound bites based on what the poling sample said their opinions should be. The problem with debates today is that we go into them expecting Lincoln and Douglas, but we walk away having watched Tom and Jerry.

Inside the margins…

Posted on by

It feels like it happened back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, but there was a time that I was an aspiring political scientist. The research methods class we had to take for the major spent what felt like an inordinate amount of time talking about polling, bias, and sampling error. It didn’t seem like such a big deal at the time and I remember learning that most reputable polls have a margin of error “sweet spot” of +/- 2-4%.

Since I tend to watch and listen to more news than the average Nielson family, I’ve been noticing something slightly disturbing about the polls that both sides are using to claim imminent victory – some of them have a margin of error of +/- 9-12%. That doesn’t seem like a big deal… unless you’re locked in a race where the candidates are consistently within a handful of percentage points of one another. One of the polls I saw Sunday night had the presidential candidates within five percentage points of one another, but had a margin of error of 11%. Sure that was in the fine print and no one is really supposed to pay attention to that kind of thing, but there it was right at the bottom of the chart. 11%. In case you’re having trouble keeping up, just know that 11% allows for a polling error big enough to drive a train through.

So what’s my point? Absolutely nothing, other than with 40-odd days to go this election is way, way too close to call. Well, that and the fact that just because you see something on television doesn’t make it true. Before you decide to accept something the news readers tell you, don’t forget to check their sources and do a little of your own research. You’d be surprised what you can find out without going to too much trouble… and really that’s not too much to expect when we’re electing a leader of the free world.

And the winner is…

Posted on by

Other than back in 1996 when I cast my first vote in a presidential election for Bob Dole, I’ve had a pretty good track record of backing the general election winner. I like to think that I’ll keep up that trend this fall, which is why here and now I’m throwing the full faith and credit of jeffreytharp.com behind the Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. Romney wasn’t my first choice during the Republican primaries, but he’s my last choice, and ultimately he’s the right choice for America.

The history, voting record, and gigabytes of other information about the candidates is available just about everywhere and I’m not going to reiterate those points here. I just wanted to take a few lines to explain my logic and to encourage everyone reading this post to ask themselves some hard questions before they walk into the voting booth on November 6th.

As a federal employee my immediate economic self interest would dictate that I vote for the candidate that is most likely to increase the size and scope of the government, who is most likely to raise my pay, and who is most likely to keep me employed. Mitt Romney isn’t that candidate. In fact under a Romney administration, there’s a fair chance that I’ll make less money, have less opportunity for growth, and possibly see my job eliminated all together. As an employee, that makes Romney a tough sell as a potential future boss.

It wasn’t until I looked at the current situation facing the country from a different perspective that I decided Romney was the one. I had to see things from the perspective of a citizen and not an employee before they came into focus. I think it’s abundantly clear that the trajectory we’re on under the current administration is simply unsustainable. We’re facing a season of hard and uncomfortable decisions and electing them to a second term only ensures more of the same.

I’m not under any delusion of Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan being the perfect candidate, but I’m not so ossified in my opinions to think I need to agree with every position a politician or a party takes on any particular issue. The fact is I disagree with them on some pretty key elements of social policy, but this time around it’s all about the economy, stupid. If we don’t get that fixed, all the other discussions are purely academic. Ending deficit spending, reducing the national debt to a manageable level, spurring economic growth and innovation, and reforming the current byzantine tax code are the big issues for 2012… and Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are where it’s at.

Registered

Posted on by

The streets of Alexandria were crawling with Obama campaign volunteers trying to register voters this afternoon. I grudgingly have to admit that I’m impressed with their willingness to be the brunt of such open mocking by just about everyone they tried to talk to. I was surprised by that reaction especially here in northern Virginia. They’re a persistent bunch, I’ll give them credit for that. Though I don’t think badgering people trying to enjoy their extra hot venti vanilla latte on the patio is a great way to win friends and influence people. That might be something to file away for future reference.

Selective enforcement…

Posted on by

I’ve got a real issue with any administration that selectively enforces the law. Either an action is illegal or it isn’t, otherwise what’s the purpose of describing yourself as being a nation of laws. By effectively granting amnesty to illegal immigrants under the age of 30, President Obama decreed that both the letter and the intent of current US law regarding immigration is irrelevant. Of course the current president isn’t the first to decide that the law is whatever he says it happens to be at the time. Once safely out of office, I seem to recall Nixon saying something about “When the president does it, that means it’s not illegal.” Nixon was wrong then just as much as President Obama is wrong now.

I’m not going to drag this blog into a discussion of whether current immigration policy is right or wrong (for the record, I think it needs to be overhauled and then actually enforced, not necessarily in that order). This isn’t a discussion of right and wrong or good and bad, it’s a simple discussion about whether the President of the United States should “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” or just make it up as he goes along. Here’s a hint, one of those two courses of action is spelled out word for word in the Constitution. In cases there’s any confusion, it’s always a good rule of thumb to consult the national user’s manual for guidance.

The president finds the idea of deporting illegal immigrants unethical and unpleasant (not to mention bad for reelection). Fine. I understand that. I find the federal income tax laws unethical and unpleasant. Does that mean I can go ahead and just not pay those this year, or is ignoring the law solely the preserve of the Executive Office of the President? Where does it end? Should companies ignore clean air and water laws or regulations because they’re inconvenient? Maybe it’s ok if soldiers don’t follow lawful orders on the battlefield. After all, the Commander-in-Chief set the precedent that it’s ok just to do whatever it is you happen to agree with.

Even taking away the political implications that will certainly prevent this country from discussing the issue in any rational way, this is bad governance. It’s another step on our race to the bottom. Shame on you, Mr. President. Shame on you for sneaking in the side door what you don’t have the capital or popular support to get done the right way. Shame on you for putting expediency and political considerations ahead of your sworn duty.

From the Mailbag: On Wisconsin

Posted on by

The Question: What are your thoughts on the recall election in Wisconsin?

The Answer: As a rule, I’m not a fan of recall elections. Every four years we go to a lot of time, expense, and trouble of electing our state governors. Thanks to a spastic media and more political blogs than anyone could ever possible read, we pretty much know what we’re going to get in a candidate. If someone, like Scott Walker campaigns on a platform of lowering the cost of state government, reducing its size, and decreasing the influence of public sector unions, well, it stands to reason that he’s going to at least try to do some of those things when he gets elected. Trying to recall the guy for doing something that you don’t like smacks of childish tantrum-throwing, especially when you’re going to have a regularly scheduled opportunity to throw the bum out in two years.

I don’t have any great love for public sector unions. As a teacher I was forced to be a dues paying member of one as a condition of employment. Even now, I’m nominally “represented” by a union, though it lacks the ability to negotiate pay or really do much of any substance. At least I don’t have to pay for the privilege this time around. As a public sector employee, I’d be up in arms too if the powers that be unilaterally decided to slash my pay, cut my benefits, or otherwise endanger my livelihood. Given the state of the federal budget for the foreseeable future, it’s an issue I’ve actually give a lot of thought to lately. After two years of a pay freeze, and a massive impending cut to my department’s budget next year, it’s not all that hard to see myself screaming bloody murder from the atop the barricades. Even so, I think history has proven recall elections to be little more than an enormous waste of money for everyone involved.

It’s a bad time to be a government employee at any level – local, state, or federal. Budgets are going to continue to diminish, services are going to be reduced, and the number of employees is going to decrease. The public is pissed at the politicians and the only group the politicians can kick with impunity are the rank and file government employees. From the tealeaves I’m reading, I get the sense that times are going to look a lot bleaker before they even think about getting better. Even so, I think there are more productive uses of my time and effort that playing the recall game. I’d find it much more satisfying to see someone’s reelection campaign go down in flames head to head against a candidate I support. I’ve always felt it was better to vote for something I believe it rather than just voting against someone I don’t like.

Habemus nominee…

Posted on by

Yes ladies and gentlemen, the Republican Party finally has a nominee for president. Thanks for that, Texas. Sure, we’ve all known where it was headed for a couple of months now, but making it official seems like sort of a big deal to the media anyway. It means we can all now all get on board with the serious business of beating the other side to a bloody pulp and proclaiming the last man standing our king for the next four years. What’s not to like about that, right?

I wish I could vote for half of Mitt Romney. The half that says he wants to control spending and keep taxes at something close to a manageable level. The half that wants to use the federal government to regulate our personal lives I’d like to disavow and never speak of again. Once again, it appears I’ll be going to the voting booth, holding my nose, and voting for the least sucky of a hugely sucky pair of contenders… Unless he picks some ridiculous crackpot running mate. Then I’ll probably just stay home and weep for my country.

What Annoys Jeff this Week?

Posted on by

1. The Prius. I’m sure you’re feeling very smug and superior about the gas you’re saving, Mr. Prius Driver, as you tool along at 40 miles an hour on a major commuter artery. What you really need to do though is either a) Buy a car that can actually keep up with the flow of traffic; b) Leave at a time other than when 10,000 people are trying to get home for the evening; c) Die in a horrible, fiery crash. It doesn’t make any difference at all to me which option you decide to exercise.

2. The election. I love politics, but can we seriously just shut up and vote already. Is there really anyone out there that hasn’t already made up their mind about who they’ll vote for in November. Admit it, the presidential election is the big draw. We’re no more likely to know more about the down-ticket candidates in November than we do now anyway. It’s ok, I’m not going to judge you for not knowing jack about the candidates for county commissioner, judge, or dog catcher. Let’s just save the time, effort, and hours of blathering on television and get on with it already. A hot mess now, a hot mess later, either way it’s going to be a hot mess. I’d rather just get it out of the way sooner rather than later.

3. In what universe does it take 14 hours to respond to an email that requires a simple yes or no answer. I’m not asking anyone to transcribe A Tale of Two Cities with their thumbs, just type in a two or three letter response and hit send. I know the Blackberry you’re carrying is an arcane bit of technology, but if memory serves, it’s pretty good at receiving and sending email, so unclench you sphincter, remove your head from your rectum, and keep up.

4. Being a Landlord. If there’s anything that sucks more than being a renter, it’s being a landlord. It’s even worse when you’re a landlord by proxy because that means you have to make decisions on the fly based on grainy pictures and not much information. Don’t believe me? Let me know how you feel when your property manager tells you that you need to spend 1/75th the “post correction” value of the house you’re already losing money on every month to fix the driveway because the slab is cracked and sinking at odd angles. I should have just asked him how much it would cost to hire an arsonist

Primary colors…

Posted on by

When I voted for the first time, I was so excited that I could hardly contain myself. Low, this decade and a half later, I’m beginning to notice a slightly disturbing trend. Not only do I get less enthused about every passing election, but for as long as I can remember, my Primary track record has been adorned exclusively by losers. That’s not a personal attack or a judgment statement. I’ve voted for an eventual loser of the Republican nomination in every primary election since 1996. Don’t try to figure out if that says more about me or the party. It says plenty about both of us.

Still, out of some misbegotten sense of having a voice in the process, I schlepped to the polling place today after work, stood in line for a few minutes, and then cast my vote for a guy who’s sure to be well out of the race by the end of the month. It’s my own little tradition… Like fireworks on the 4th of July or dreams of a white Christmas… If it’s primary day, I’m off to go vote for a guy who will probably never be on another ballot in either of our lifetimes. On the bright side, at least the ballot is full of people for state and local office that I’ve never heard of before. With me, anything below the POTUS nominee race is pretty much a role of the dice based on what information I can scavenge up a day or so before walking into the booth. It’s the only part of primary day that’s even remotely interesting (and I use “interesting” in a very general kind of way).

We’ve been doing this for more or less 226 years. You’d think by now we’d have come up with a better process. Quaint as it is, it’s probably time for our election system to wander out of the 18th century and in the general direction of the 21st. Seriously, why isn’t there an app for this?

Playing the numbers…

Posted on by

With the collapse of deficit reduction “supercommittee”, once again the inestimable Congress of the United States has failed to do, well, anything at all. Since their collective approval rating hovers around 9%, you’d think that almost every member of the House and 1/3 of the members of the Senate would be looking for work after the next election. The fact is that over the last twenty years, House members seeking reelection are victorious well over 90% of the time. For their re-electable colleagues in the Senate, that number is closer to 80%. Still better odds than you’ll ever get in Vegas (unless you’re the house, of course). Using some roughly accurate statistics, that’s a long way of saying that unless something dramatic changes between now and the election, the Congress we have now is largely going to be the Congress we have after the election. If that doesn’t make you queasy, you’re probably not paying much attention.

Partisans on the left and the right will tell you that this is the perfect reason we need term limits imposed on elected officials. I submit that it’s not so much an issue of term limits being needed as it is a clear message about how engaged electorate is. Cycle after cycle, a small percentage of eligible voters go to the polls and select the guy whose name they’ve heard before, or the one who has the prettiest yard signs, or the one who had the nicest looking piece of direct mail. In doing that, the voters just don’t stop to ask if their particular senator or representative is part of the problem. If that person is currently serving, here’s a hint: He or she is the problem and needs to be replaced. Two years from now, if that new individual has become part of the problem, they need to be replaced. And again until voters stumble on someone responsive to the needs of the country and who’s putting national priorities above regional benefits or party politics.

Until that happens, we’re going to continue to get the kind of government we deserve. That is to say a government that is hopelessly dysfunctional. Elections are won based on who shows up. If all most people do is bitch and complain and let the same 20% who always show up to vote have their way, well, we’ll get the same level dysfunction we’ve all come to know and loathe. If you’re pissed off, if you want something different then it’s on you to get educated, make smart decisions, and actually go to your polling place. If you can’t be bothered to do even that much, then you’re a bigger part of the problem then the asshats we keep electing.