Skip to main content

The Delaware Way: This is called keeping your bets hedged

When Libertarian 5th District Senate candidate Scott Gesty and I were first discussing his campaign, he talked about the fact that the choices offered to Delaware voters by the Republicans and Democrats are pretty much indistinguishable.

This was the specific example he gave:
Last cycle, I got direct mail from the teachers union supporting my democrat opponent [Chris Counihan], and then the next day I get the same direct mail with my Republican Senators [Cathy Cloutier] face on it!  It was nuts.  I didn’t vote for Senate in 2010.  There was no choice . . . 
At first I found this difficult to credit, but when I was looking up the campaign donations for each candidate in that race, I made an intriguing discovery.

In 2010 the law firm of Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor used its PAC on 29 September to give $300 to Christopher Counihan.

Almost exactly one month later, Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor used its PAC (25 October) to give $300 to Catherine Cloutier.

Both records can be accessed via the Commissioner of Elections website.

Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor is one of Delaware's heavy-hitter law firms, which invests heavily in our elections, spending nearly $29,000 in contributions via its PAC in 2010.

One of the few glimpses into the inner workings of such a major player in our electoral politics came in 2010, when Above The Law ran a post on how Young Conaway controller Joe Lofink accidentally "outed" all of the firm's non-equity partners.  For those interested in the interconnections of Delaware politics, cross-indexing that list against the list of candidates receiving Young Conaway campaign donations is interesting.

But the question does remain:  what interests would you be protecting by donating to both the Democrat and Republican in the same race?

And Scott?

Let us know when the check comes, will you?

Comments

Jim Fryar said…
I remember my father, a WW2 veteran saying there was an expression, "Praise the Lord and respect the Devil and you can't go wrong." This could be something similar, except perhaps its, "Praise Lucifer and respect the Devil."
Nancy Willing said…
ooh, can't wait to dig in.
Scott Gesty said…
I have a gut feeling that particular check wont be heading my way.

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 ...