3rd district: Mandate for change vs. plumb mud stuck?

Yesterday I received a post-election report alleging that following last week’s 3rd council district candidate debate, members of the Steve Price entourage were telling area renters that candidate Charlie Harshfield regarded them as, ahem ... shall I say ... subhuman.

While plausible given the vacuity of the incumbent’s customary antics, such stories are difficult to verify, and of course a brief survey of American political history reveals far more numerous examples of political trash talk, the slinging of mud and the telling of lies – here and elsewhere in a nation that we’re often told is the last, best hope for mankind.

Interestingly, in their debate statements the challengers Harshfield and Maury Goldberg both openly embraced an aggressive reform package with regard to the city’s rental properties, one that would include registrations and inspections.

Price’s response was to ineffectually mumble old platitudes about personal hygiene and his long forgotten cleanliness ordinance, which in effect has been rendered moot by his own congenital refusal while on the council to aid, assist and fund the cause of citywide ordinance enforcement.

In the end, almost two-thirds of the Democratic vote in the 3rd District was cast for one or the other challenger, something that strongly suggests that Price is in the minority on most campaign issues in spite of whatever dubious tactics he may (or may not) have employed.

Did Price have this stark repudiation in mind when he told newspaper reporters that his threadbare margin of victory indicated that the people of his district favor change?

Frankly, I doubt it. The change that Price speaks of is “spare change,” not the more valuable variety that genuinely commands the ability to change lives for the better.

As ever, he's penny wise, future foolish.

----

A question subsequently was asked of me:

“How does an opponent respond to lies (like the subhuman renter analogy), as well as to the sort of promises a politician makes knowing full well that the allegations are false and the promises are impossible to keep?”

I believe that the best response to provocations of this sort is for the opposing candidate to retain his or her passion and integrity, to conduct his or her campaign with dignity, to respect the ability of people to “get it,” and above all else, to simply tell the truth. If the listener is unable to fathom it, and insists on believing the palpably untrue, it’s a vote you probably didn’t have a chance of securing in the first place.

Councilman Price now advances to November. He may well have done so with the help of a few tall tales about his opponents, and that’s just good ol' boy politics. However, as opposed to convenient fabrications about renters, progressives, the city's debt limit and other forays into the realm of Pinocchio, Tuesday’s 3rd district numbers simply don’t lie.

The incumbent has nothing remotely resembling a mandate.

The only question is whether he’s sufficiently astute to see it.