Candidates Excluded from Debate
The Journal Gazette reports that the debate among democratic candidates vying to face Mark Souder in the fall only invited two of the four candidates. Story here. Tom Hayhurst and Kevin Boyd will face off against each. The other two candidates, Thomas Schrader and Edward Smith were not invited.
When asked about why the other two candidates were not invited, Steven Haines, 3rd District chairman for the Democratic party stated “As far as I’m concerned we’ve got two viable candidates, and I would like to limit it to them.”
Haines' comment will in all likelyhood kill the campaigns of Schrader and Smith. It also spells bigger problems for the Democrat party in the third district. Haines cannot afford to exclude candidates when his party has issues recruiting people to run as it is.
When asked about why the other two candidates were not invited, Steven Haines, 3rd District chairman for the Democratic party stated “As far as I’m concerned we’ve got two viable candidates, and I would like to limit it to them.”
Haines' comment will in all likelyhood kill the campaigns of Schrader and Smith. It also spells bigger problems for the Democrat party in the third district. Haines cannot afford to exclude candidates when his party has issues recruiting people to run as it is.
posted by Indiana Pundit at 10:15 AM
14 Comments:
That's bad news for Kevin Knuth & Co. They had a hard enough time getting candidates to run against Roach. Now his district chair is hand-picking candidates?
Who is Schrader? Who is Smith? Who knows anyone who knows who they are? Can you Google them? Blaming Haines for their lack of viability is just silly. Sorry. They are running against a city councilman who has been reelected twice, and a minister who is both articulate and active in the party. So tell me again why Schrader and Smith are viable?
I'm not saying that Schrader and Smith were viable. I'm saying comments from a party chair will influence the voters of his party. Any viability they had was lost with that comment.
But you missed the bigger implication. The comment will discourage some political neophytes from running for office.
If you exclude those from the process eventually there will be nobody left to participate.
Can you Google them? Is that what represents the viability of a candidate for office? Isn’t that a question for the voters to decide?
Suppose your party elite had left out Al Sharpton and Joe Lieberman from the Democratic presidential debates? Neither were viable, right?
Tom Schrader was arrested a few years back for doing things in Swinney Park that you are not supposed to do.
Is it really worth having him in a debate?
Really.. I Googled it, nothing. I will look around tomorrow, it might fit in on my Blog ;-)
I think debates should involve all of the candidates; anything else is shameful.
Mike Sylvester
Thank you for the idealism Mr. Sylvester, but now, comments from the real world.
This event has been planned for months now. If either other candidate wanted to be involved in the debate, they should say so. They havent overtly stated that they wanted to partake.
AWB- look back around the time of his city council run- I believe that was 1999.
He then held a press conference to explain what had happened- and that it was not a problem because they were consenting adults...blah, blah, blah.
The problem- he was living at an "aids house" that was supposed to be a discrete deal- but of course, he announced it in his press conference.
How can someone "overtly state that they want to partake". If I'm a candidate I expect to be invited to a debate with my peers. Especially those from my own party.
If they filed on-time, they should be allowed to participate. E.O.D.
Allow the voters to decide which candidates are "viable"; how will we ever welcome new blood, new ideas if the only people given approval to run (tacit disproval from Haines of two candidates)are those with whom we are already familiar? Too much good-ole'-boy network for me; if two of the candidates are totally lame, the debate will make that clear to all involved.
I have yet to see ANY Campaigning by...man, I even forgot these two guys names. Have they campaigned at all?
This has nothing to do with "hand picking" candidates for the election in the fall. That is what 'Republican' means in Allen county. The fact of the matter is, Kevin Boyd and Tom Hayhurst were the two candidates "known" to be campaigning from the third district even before the election deadline. If either...(forgot their names again) contacted democrat headquarters and showed viability of a campaign, they would have most certainly been allowed to partake.
Notice how NEITHER of the two allegidly "snubbed" candidates have come forward in outrage. This is being blown WAY out of proportion.
After reading this dialogue, I don't think there is any question why the "Average Joe" feels completely disenfranchised by two-party politics. It's a big bag of excrement even at the district levels and lower. Kinda gives the constituents a feeling of "bad or worse" when picking candidates for whom to vote. Sorry, but district chairs are not who I wish to decide how many opinions I get to hear from candidates.
Post a Comment
<< Home