Jul 29, 2022Liked by Hank Stephenson, Arizona Agenda
Campaigns are odd things - we sometimes look for tea leaves in them to imagine how a candidate will perform in the job itself, and while they may give some insight, there are other factors that matter more. While this article is interesting (and well-written, as usual), I do think that it is important to remember that we are facing an election, not a job interview in which an employer (the voter in our case) has potentially unlimited opportunities to consider alternates. There will be, after Tuesday, a limited choice: Hobbs or Lopez on one side, and Lake or Robson on the other. And whatever limitations any candidate has, particularly in running their campaigns (and choosing campaign staff), in the end, there will be a binary choice. That choice should not be by default, by disqualifying one side for some bad decision. It has to be a comparison, and in this case a comparison based on likely actions in a key post that could affect education, women's health, the environment (especially the climate challenge), public health in the face of epidemics, and so much more. The bad practices that sometimes plague campaigns are a sideshow compared to the main event of the electoral result itself.
I wonder if similar issues plague the Lake or Robson campaigns? My favored Dem candidate dropped out of the race, and Hobbs was not my second choice due to her lack of accountability with the Adams firing, I will vote for her if she wins the primary.
Democratic campaigns can be awful. I've dealt with sexual harassment and had wages withheld. I can only image how Republicans treat their people if Democrats are willing to treat their staff with such disrespect. My takeaway is there's a dearth of quality candidates and due to the nature of campaign work, a dearth of campaign workers with "real world" experience.
November's gubernatorial election will give moderate voters three choices: the Democrat, a cigarette or a blindfold. This is not searching for a saint; it comparison shopping.
Campaigns are odd things - we sometimes look for tea leaves in them to imagine how a candidate will perform in the job itself, and while they may give some insight, there are other factors that matter more. While this article is interesting (and well-written, as usual), I do think that it is important to remember that we are facing an election, not a job interview in which an employer (the voter in our case) has potentially unlimited opportunities to consider alternates. There will be, after Tuesday, a limited choice: Hobbs or Lopez on one side, and Lake or Robson on the other. And whatever limitations any candidate has, particularly in running their campaigns (and choosing campaign staff), in the end, there will be a binary choice. That choice should not be by default, by disqualifying one side for some bad decision. It has to be a comparison, and in this case a comparison based on likely actions in a key post that could affect education, women's health, the environment (especially the climate challenge), public health in the face of epidemics, and so much more. The bad practices that sometimes plague campaigns are a sideshow compared to the main event of the electoral result itself.
I wonder if similar issues plague the Lake or Robson campaigns? My favored Dem candidate dropped out of the race, and Hobbs was not my second choice due to her lack of accountability with the Adams firing, I will vote for her if she wins the primary.
Democratic campaigns can be awful. I've dealt with sexual harassment and had wages withheld. I can only image how Republicans treat their people if Democrats are willing to treat their staff with such disrespect. My takeaway is there's a dearth of quality candidates and due to the nature of campaign work, a dearth of campaign workers with "real world" experience.
there's not much here. a campaign manager is kind of mean? ok.
This is the type of reporting that makes you special. Keep it up. Thanks
November's gubernatorial election will give moderate voters three choices: the Democrat, a cigarette or a blindfold. This is not searching for a saint; it comparison shopping.