Skip to main content

My picks for the Delaware elections.

I'm sure that the picks of the folks at Delawareliberal will draw much more local attention than mine, but what the hell....

For US Congress I'm voting for Libertarian Mark Anthony Parks and against Republican Mike Castle. There are no end of reasons to vote against Castle at this point, as much as I like him personally. [Truth in advertising: as Governor, back in the early 1990s, Castle appointed me as co-chair of the State Social Studies Curriculum Frameworks Commission.] But Mike has rolled over too many times for the Bush administration despite an image of bipartisanship. He'll win again this year, but he won't get my vote. I'm choosing Mark Parks not just out of party loyalty, but because Mark is a man who keenly believes in limited government, personal freedom, and a non-interventionist foreign policy. He won't win, but I'm hopeful we haven't heard the last from him.

For Governor I'm going to vote for Jack Markell, despite most of his current campaign positions, because I've got confidence in the fact that his fiscal instincts are inherently sound and I've no confidence whatever that Bill Lee is even paying attention.

For Lieutenant Governor I'm going to vote for Matt Denn, placing more confidence in his work ethic than anything else, although I think several of his education ideas have merit. Besides, I absolutely refuse to capitulate to assholes who will vote against Markell-Denn purely on the basis of religion.

For Insurance Commissioner I'm going to vote for John Brady, who has a record suggesting he actually knows what the hell he is doing.

For 20th District Representative I'm going to vote to return Nick Manolakos to the General Assembly.

Let's see: one Libertarian, two Democrats, and two Republicans; ticket-splitting in the finest Delaware fashion.

And for President? That's another post, another day.

Comments

Brian Shields said…
The same way, I will vote for two Libertarians, four Democrats, two Republicans.. and following Shirley's lead, two write ins for races I feel both don't represent me.

Senate and Sussex County Council District 1. In my council district a man is running unopposed to a seat he hasn't held before with absolutely no platform. I can't vote for him if he offers no issues.

I haven't decided what word to write in yet, but it will be some ideal I do not see in these candidates.
"For Lieutenant Governor I'm going to vote for Matt Denn, placing more confidence in his work ethic than anything else"

I like the rest of your picks but I think this one is weak. Denn held a state office. in the same time Copeland held down a state office, a company and led a non-profit.
Anonymous said…
"I absolutely refuse to capitulate to assholes who will vote against Markell-Denn purely on the basis of religion."

Religion? I think I've missed something. What's the religious argument?
Joe
They're both Jewish, which has led to some significant resistance in some quarters
They're both Jewish, which has led to some significant resistance in some quarters

Unbelievable. I had not heard this.

I am voting for Markell for Gov, Copeland for Lt Gov.
tom said…
I'm going w/ Copeland for Lt. Governor because he's been the closest thing we've had to a libertarian in the General Assembly.

And while I'm glad that Markell beat Carney in the primary, and I think he'll be a better Governor than Minner, I'm voting for Lee. I see his lack of a huge agenda as a good thing, whereas Markell is committed to spending lots & lots of the taxpayers money. I have no real expectation that he could win, but I have to vote for the policies i prefer, and "no tax increases" definitely beats Markell's program.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...