Fairness and Foley
So Mark Foley resigned in disgrace, and obviously
isn't running for re-election. I've already said that I don't think his sexual
escapades with 16 year old boys are all that big a
deal.Florida law prevents Foley's name
from being removed from the ballot this late in the game. Instead, votes for
him will go to his replacement. I'm sure there's some logic in that law,
preventing parties from switching candidates at the last
minute.Democrats want to
prevent the posting of notices at ballot sites that votes for Foley
won't really go for him, but will go for Emmie Ross, his
replacement.Sure, posting signs near a
ballot is illegal, and reasonably so. Still, the Democrats aren't fighting it
because of the principle of the thing. They're fighting because they hope it
will help them win. Surely fewer people will vote for Foley if they're ignorant
about how it works, right?This is
slimy. If they can't convince voters fair and square that the Democratic
candidate is the right guy, they don't deserve to
win.This reminds me of Gore's tactic
in Florida in 2000 of trying to only recount the most Democrat-heavy counties.
Both are tactics without integrity. And shouldn't our politicians strive to be
models of integrity?Make people as
well-informed as possible. Let them vote fair, and count 'em
fair.If I was Ross's opponent, I'd
allow the postings. I'd debate the new opponent, and make as sure as possible
the voters knew that the Foley scandal should not be a major factor in the next
race.But then, that's probably why
I'll never be a politician.
Filed Sun - October 15, 2006, 10:20 AM in
Return to: |