Geez, NAC is starting to feel profoundly marginalized. Are they trying to tell us something?
According to the July 4 edition of the Tribune, and contrary to all previous indications, there’ll be yet another three-way race in the 3rd council district. With the entry into the race of a Libertarian, incumbent Steve “36% Solution” Price will be gifted with his third chance in four career races to win an election by polling less than half the votes cast.
Where is Walt Kelly’s Pogo in our time of need?
While the article by reporter Eric Scott Campbell isn’t archived on-line as of this writing, here is an excerpt:
Days after the Floyd County Rpublican Party appointed Brenda Scharlow to oppose District 3 City Council incumbent Steve Price, a Democrat, in the Nov. 6 election, a Libertarian has joined that race.
Thomas Keister lives on Center Street near Bicknell Park in the city’s east side. He hasn’t run for office before.
Not so fast. Keister (sorry, but purchasing an on-line diploma doesn't make one a "Dr." any more than the Wizard of Westside's Bazooka Joe U. parchment makes him an expert on sewers) actually ran for sheriff last year, with this electoral eulogy offered by the Tribune’s Jennifer Rigg on November 9, 2006:
In the end, (Democrat Darrell) Mills received 12,490 votes with 49.9 percent of the vote while (Republican Frank) Loop received 12,056 and 48.1 percent of the vote. Libertarian candidate Thomas Keister had 503 votes.
Keister’s My Space site makes reference to a second county office run in the past, but is not specific, although it details his involvement with the world of championship wrestling.
Meanwhile, a self-penned Keister press release at Associated Content touts a presumably unscientific 8th precinct telephone poll that shows him losing resoundingly to Price, but with a higher level of support than the Republican candidate.
Wonderful.
The filing deadline passed without a challenger to 1st district incumbent Dan Coffey, and also blessedly was absent last-minute maneuvering by veteran 4th district thespian Larry Kochert. With 2nd district incumbent Bill Schmidt defeated by Bob Caesar in the primary, and pending the results of the general election, at least the council’s Gang of Four has been halved.
Can a Libertarian make a difference in the 3rd? Only if the 3rd is different from the 1st. Let's go back to the July 4 Tribune article:
Libertarian George McAfee ran for the District 1 City Council seat in 2003, earning 19 votes to incumbent Democrat Dan Coffey’s 841 and Republican challenger Richard Berryman’s 216.
That’s 2%.
By the way, we're prepared to consider candidate platforms for the fall election ... and reasonable offers for our houses.
I looked on Keisters myspace but couldn't find anything about any platform. Anyone else have any info?
ReplyDeleteI'm not aware of any platforms, Ceece, either from Keister or Scharlow.
ReplyDeleteWe already know the platform espoused by the incumbent: "Nothing from nothing leaves nothing."
Apologies to Billy Preston.
I just do not and can not bring myself to understand this type of political move.
ReplyDeletePeople want change, yes it is true. But change has a better chance of happening when it is a 50/50 chance that the incumbant will be defeated.
BUt when a third person throws their name into the hat, those chances are dropped down to 33%.
Then the good old name recocgnition machine kicks into high gear, and the next thing you know another term in office for CM Price.
I know there are those who really like him, and feel that he is on top of everything, but from what I have read, heard and seen, the outward appearance would indicate otherwise.
From a pure "political" standpoint, it may be worth checking to see if Mr. Keister is aligned with Mr. Price. Basically, Price's camp could have asked him to run to insure Mr. Price's election.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good call, IAH. Rumor has it that Dan Coffey was urging at least one 3rd district resident to do the same, and for like reasoning with the scenario you offer.
ReplyDeleteI'm serene. We've taken the high road throughout, advocated and practiced principled transparency, and been kneecapped by friend and foe alike. No more evidence is needed to support my contention that so long as the people of the 3rd refuse to practice strategies for winning, that they must instead prefer losing ... and so be it.
With respect to Keister, the chances are that his presence in the race will prove to be no more than marginal. The Patoka District Priceless camp has already commenced the smear campaign against Scharlow, the Republicans won't take our requests for a platform seriously, and to be honest, I flat don't give a flying f*&k at the present time.
Gee, it felt good to write that after all this time.
As Sonny and Cher once noted, the beat goes on. The city gets more poor, more stupid, and more dysfunctional with each such self-inflicted injury; the Luddites smile and grin, the incumbent offers absolutely no opinion on anything substantive save the desire to protect his people from improvement, and the cycle is endlessly repeated.
So, let 'em eat cake, or in this case, Twinkies. At 12.01 PM today, I intend to drink a progressive pint at one of three downtown establishments that offer shelter from these storms.
To paraphrase Hemingway's description of the bottle as a means of sovereign action, when you're finished drinking from the glass, at least you can still throw it at an unreconstructed obstructionist.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYep. Maury knows it all too well.
ReplyDeleteThe Libertarian Party had a convention and nominated Mr.Keister; so much for the Grassy Knoll Theory of 3rd District politics.
ReplyDeletePlatform? A better question is can a mayoral,of either political party, candidate work with any of the three candidates for Third District City Council? Ask the City Council candidates if they intend to work with their party's Mayor's candidate and why.
Platform? Ask the 3 candidated if any of the Platform points debated in the spring primary would they follow? Are they going to draft a new platform? Hmmmmm
Well Roger, Which tribe of the political duopoly will the Third District vote for? For me ,I am off to search for the elusive bottle of Gueuez in the New Albany Metro Area.
Maury
In the end Price will win.
ReplyDeleteThis is what I said earlier but wanted to get the latter post in first.
Maury
The 3rd district continues to operate in fractured disorder and its government continues to reflect that.
ReplyDeleteBeyond the temporary set back of another Price term, I'm most concerned about a loss of collective crediblity. The district's inability to practice what it preaches places it in the rather uncomfortable role of being what it most criticizes.
If Price wins, he will have outsmarted at least 60% of the district's voting population.
Where is the Democratic party of Floyd County in all of this? How can they just sit back and let this happen?
ReplyDeleteAnyone?
The Demos drink the same water as the rest of us, and they have no control over the Libertarian nomnating convention that met in the last remaining phone booth in town and selected a guy who is completely non-cognizant of what has happened in the district for the past four years.
ReplyDeleteSomewhere Rod Serling is giggling.
I guess I meant more about Steve Price, can't they send their men in black to yank away Price's "Democrat Card"?
ReplyDelete;-)
Sure, they could pull the 36% Solution's Demo card -- IF they had an official platform of core beliefs that he ran counter to. But they don't, even if many have admirable personal political tenets.
ReplyDeleteTheir job is to put Democrats into office, period, and under the current way of doing things, Price remains a Democrat in spite of doing things that aren't.
I really wish the Tribune would take on the chore of challenging the notion of political parties in the region.
ReplyDeleteIt would seem a reasonable election season activity to ask each party to articulate their platform and explain how their candidates represent it, although it may lead to an incredible amount of white space in that particular edition.
Ceece:
ReplyDeleteAs has been recounted often, the words of the early 20th century wit, Will Rogers, are true today, "I belong to no organized political party , I'm a Democrat."
There is no litmus test to being a Democrat. The political parties (as Bob Dylan called them "social clubs in drag disguise") we have now are more polarized than in the recent past, but this is primarily, as I see it, the result of Republicans feeling their oats and finally laying their alegiance to corporate power out in the open. In the 1980s the slogan "greed is good" assaulted one's ear, today greed simply is. One doesn't swim in a cesspool and come out smelling sweet, so the Democrats, nationally, are playing the same corporate chase (badly) as the Republicans and it has cost the party at that level. But remember, it was Lyndon Johnson who pushed the civil rights legislation of the sixties with full knowledge that it would cost the Democrats the once-vanquished South for a generation. That loss is still felt today-- but the cause was right.
At the local level, those who want Steve Price out of the picture, or Dan Coffey or John Gonder can push their agenda and should do so. Those in opposition to the status quo must follow the dictum "unity of purpose". That does not allow for hoisting people up based on personality alone. If a valid spokesman for your cause exists, rally behind that person and follow "unity of purpose" rather than allowing fractiousness to dull unity.
Do not totally disregard without expending the effort, the possibility that your lobbying could sway representatives with whom you disagree toward your view. It would not be easy but this is, after all, New Albany and you have complete access to these people.