E-mail Scott
Scott's Links
About the Author
Opinion Archives
Social Media:
Google Plus
Monthly Archives:

January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
September 2014
October 2014
November 2014
December 2014
January 2015
February 2015
March 2015
April 2015
May 2015
June 2015
July 2015
August 2015
September 2015
October 2015
November 2015
December 2015
January 2016
February 2016
March 2016
April 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016
November 2016
December 2016
January 2017
February 2017
March 2017
April 2017
May 2017
June 2017

Powered by Blogger
Subscribe via RSS

Friday, July 17, 2015

Another nakedly partisan attack on Republicans

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 12:30 PM (#)

Four years ago, the Herald-Times published a nakedly partisan editorial calling for the Monroe County Republican Party to be abolished. They tried to walk it back after taking some criticism, but the record was clear. (See here and here and here and here for more.) Now, the H-T editorial board is gloating about a how the Republican Party has allegedly regressed from 2011, citing a controversy over slating candidates and a ballot with uncontested races.

First, let's examine the facts. Four years ago, the only district the Republican Party challenged was District 1. The Republicans could have had a candidate in District 1 this year, but that potential candidate realized that a three-way contest would only guarantee a Democratic victory and is supporting the Libertarian candidate. That individual is now running at-large as a write-in candidate. (That would be me.)

The Republican Party is has a candidate for District 3, which we did not have in 2011. There were two people who sought to run at-large as Republicans (the same number that we had in 2011) though party chairman Steve Hogan only certified one of those two. Most importantly, the Republican Party has a candidate for Mayor, which we did not have in 2011. The Republican Party is, at worst, in the same position we were in 2011. Actually, we are better off.

To put it another way: The worst-case scenario for Democrats in 2011 was a 6-3 Democratic majority on the city council to go with a Democratic mayor and city clerk.. The worst case scenario for Democrats in 2015 is a 5-3-1 majority, with a Republican mayor and a Democratic city clerk. Is that scenario likely? No. But in terms of candidate recruitment, this is not a step backward at all.

There was one statement in the editorial that should be corrected. The editorial board wrote that in addition to not certifying the candidacy of a Republican who sought to run at-large, "(Steve Hogan) also did not certify Denise DeMars, who sought to run for city clerk."

This is a factually correct statement, but is not true. the fact of the matter is that DeMars changed her mind and decided she did not want to run for clerk. Hogan did not certify her candidacy at her own request. The Herald-Times editorial leaves the impression that the party chairman refused to certify a city clerk candidate duly elected by Republican Party precinct committeemen. That is false.

Yes, Republicans have fought amongst ourselves this year, as we always have and always will. Such is the nature of a big-tent party - and this challenge is an action of one person, not an indication of a deep division in the party. It is also very interesting how quickly the Herald-Times forgets about the vitriol Democrats spewed at each other during the primary. Much of this was about Darryl Neher's primary voting record, but we should not forget the absolute unhinged hatred for Andy Ruff and Dave Rollo over the deer cull issue.

No, the Republican Party is not at the level we were in 1999, where (despite going from three seats on the council to two seats) it was a close election where about one hundred votes in two council districts could have brought a 5-4 Republican majority. There is no question that the Republicans are much stronger in the county than in the city, and it is not surprising that potential Republican candidates (especially top-tier Republican candidates) would be shy about running in the city after forty years of Democratic control.

But a city election is not exactly unwinnable, when the third place finisher in the 2011 at-large race got 3,076 and the number one vote getter citywide (The uncontested Democratic candidate for city clerk) got 3,989 total votes in the general election. It would only take four thousand votes to win an at-large seat on the city council, hardly an insurmountable obstacle given that there were 26,519 total votes cast in the secretary of state race in 2014 and that there were 57,223 total votes cast in the Presidential election three years ago. As you can tell, turnout for city elections is pathetically low - hardly a ringing endorsement for our current Democratic city leaders.

Below are the rules for commenting on ConservaTibbs.com.

  1. A reasonable level of civility is expected. While it is expected that controversial political and social issues may generate heated debate, there are common-sense limits of civility that will be enforced.

  2. This blog is a family-friendly site. Therefore no cursing, profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, etc. will be allowed. This is a zero-tolerance rule and will result in automatic deletion of the offending post.

  3. Anonymity has greatly coarsened discourse on the Internet, so pseudonyms are discouraged but not forbidden. That said, any direct criticism of a person by name may not be done anonymously. If you criticize someone, you must subject yourself to the same level of scrutiny or the comment will be deleted.

  4. You must put a name or pseudonym on your comments. All comments by "Anonymous" will be deleted.

  5. Please keep your comments relevant to the topic of the post.

Thank you for your cooperation.


At July 18, 2015 at 8:45 AM , Blogger Mike Newton said...  

"Four years ago, the Herald-Times published a nakedly partisan editorial calling for the Monroe County Republican Party to be abolished."

Jeez, took you long enough to get "outraged" by this! Personally, I find many reasons to abolish the Stupid Party without fretting over its slating of candidates: its egregious racism and misogyny; its crazy ideas about rape; the habitual mingling of church and state, including deranged claims from multiple candidates that "God" personally chose them to run; rank corruption spearheaded by the vile Koch brothers; its daily violation of Xian principles while claiming to be a Xian party; its constant attacks on the poor, US veterans, and seniors; its denial and misrepresenting of science, etc., ad nauseam. The "Grand Old Party" is a cesspool of bigotry and lies. How any so-called educated Xian can attach himself to it and defend its patent moral bankruptcy is marvelous to behold: a true lesson in hyporisy.

At July 18, 2015 at 7:48 PM , Blogger Paul K. Ogden said...  

Is Mike off his meds again?

At July 19, 2015 at 6:53 PM , Blogger Scott Tibbs said...  

Jeez, took you long enough to get "outraged" by this!


I wrote about this, several times, when it happened. Follow the hyperlinks.