Tuesday, March 23, 2010

The One Where I Defend Del Gill

Yes, Mr. Gill has infuriated everyone, including me at times, over all the years he has been involved with Democratic Party politics. He called me about this, and I was unable to return his call, but his comments regarding the League of Women Voters debate got me thinking about his point.

And, my friends, I think he has a valid one.

As those who know him know that his passion overtakes him at times, and causes people not to take him seriously.  This can be problematic for those times when he is on to something correct.

Of course, the League of Women Voters is a private, nonpartisan organization and can invite whomever they want.  However, since we are in the PRIMARY phase of elections, where parties select nominees, and not the GENERAL phase, where candidates are actually elected, why did the LWV invite Republican candidate Mark Luttrell and NOT his GOP opponent, Ernest Lunati?  If you want to have all the candidates who will be on the GENERAL election ballot, why not wait until after the primaries are over and THEN have a debate with both nominees and all the independents?

Let's face it, it did none of the Democratic candidates any good with the people who will be voting for them in the primary to have Sheriff Luttrell up there.  It confuses voters who already wonder, sadly, why they can't vote in BOTH primaries.

Not to mention that it probably hurt Del's boss, Otis Jackson, the most.  Privately, I've been told that people laughed at him.  Frankly, Jackson is the one candidate I could not vote for in a GENERAL election, so I understand Del's frustration.

I am not going to ascribe any unseemly motives toward the LWV, as they are a solid organization with a good track record on these debates in the past.  It does seem unfair, however, to have conducted this debate in the manner in which it was conducted.  It was not fair to the Democratic candidates, to the uninvited GOP opponent Ernest Lunati, nor to the Independent candidates who will be on the August ballot.  It gives the appearance that the other candidates did not matter.

Better that the LWV have waited until after the primaries to hold this debate than risk doing the thing that I am sure they least wanted to do: confuse, rather than enlighten, the voters.

And THAT, my friends, is what I suspect Del was trying to say all along, and if I'm wrong, Del, please send me a post to argue or pop in the comments.


Tom Guleff said...

Steve, you are right, if my candidate (D,R,I) was barred from the gathering, I'd make a huge fuss with the LWV.

Mr Gill fighting for Independent or Republican candidates, not likely.

Everything else is just political positioning whether to attend such gatherings or not. (see AC Wharton's run for city mayor, he certainly did not attend every cattle call during the race)

Steve Steffens said...

True enough, but it was AC's CHOICE not to attend.