Ever seen the movie “Vantage Point”? It tells a story from the viewpoints of multiple people, each with their own motivations. If you’d like to see a local version of “Vantage Point”, it happened this week in South Hill during a Q&A session with the seven candidates for the Republican 5th District nomination. Let’s try and figure out what went on…
Let’s start off with a newspaper article of the “event”: Fifth District Republican candidates speak to area
Next, let’s take a look at what Bill Hay wrote about it: 1st Amendment Not Welcomed In Mecklenburg (Be sure to read the comments)
Now, let’s take a look at NotAndySere’s blog article about this: Is this any way to run a party?
(If we find any more articles about this circus, we’ll add them to this list.)
As we often say… “So that happened.”
Thoughts…
- Is there any person involved in this 5th District race that can stay objective? Every candidate (even the ones at the bottom of the Food Chain) deserves a chance to be heard and to ask questions.
- Will these candidates ever agree on a debate format? If they do, will they actually follow it?
- If this process continues to devolve, McPadden’s idea of a “knock-out convention” could end up being a Survivor-style Tribal Council (with Robert Hurt having the Immunity Necklace).
- I’ll moderate one of these debates if you give me the “Around The Horn” style MUTE buttons and scoring system. Come to think of that, that would be the perfect format.
- Toss-Up! Who ya got in a “Let’s take this outside!” fight? Tim Boyle or Laurence Verga?
Honestly, I don’t know what to make of that circus… except for the fact of accurately calling it a circus. Everybody has their own candidate and their own agenda. Everybody seems to think that they’re right and the others are blithering idiots. This is what I expect the Teaparty debates to become and Robert Hurt has got the right strategy of avoiding them based on what’s gone on in South Hill. Unfortunately for the other viable candidates, they’re going to have to participate in events like this and it’s not going to be pretty.
There’s a long time between now and June 8th. A very long time.
This merely demonstrated that the establishment is supporting Hurt, and it is obvious…even if it is being done “stupidly”, and clumsily.
Boyle made an absolute fool of himself, and ultimately, in my opinion, it exposes and damages Mr. Hurt.
Hurt, sat there and let this happen “in his defense”. Thanks for the leadership, Mr. State Senator. If he cannot (will not) stand up to an affront to the first amendment by the likes of Tim Boyle in South Hill, Virginia; then how can we expect him to stand up to the affronts to our liberties taking place by really powerful people in DC? Seriously. This had actually made my distrust for Mr. Hurt grow stronger.
dave, were you present at the Meck. meeting? neither was I.
it is not up to any candidate to meddle in unit business. why do you mistrust Hurt because he didn’t re-organize the entire event? why didn’t some of the other candidates step in?
The members of the Meck. unit that I know are very, very straight up. If they perceived anything “amiss” at this meeting, they would have spoken up.
Dave,
I think you’re putting your own “Vantage Point” into this too.
Kelley, I wasn’t there but saw enough of the tape. The other Candidates didn’t have a Chairman declaring a “Chairman’s Challenge” to raise funds for Bob Hurt. The other Candidates were guests.
I did see other members of the Committee complain, good for them! At one point Mr. Boyle said “If you don’t like it, you can vote me out.” that comment was directed to at least one Committee member, maybe more thought ok. I wonder if Mr. Boyle is no longer concerned about his current with the GOP position since he may have one in DC soon, hmm, just a thought.
where is mr. boyle going in DC?
From my perspective bringing up a candidate’s voting record is such a fundamental part of elections Boyle’s actions are completely and totally indefensible. The behavior of other candidates, some would say they are “obsessed” with Hurt’s voting record, may be negatives against them as a candidate. But guess what, no one is forcing you to vote for them.
I would turn to Virgil Goode’s criticism of Tucker Watkin’s behavior in the primary: (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/01/virgil_goode_groups_have_talke.html)
“Although Goode said he knows and likes all the candidates and described Hurt as “a nice fellow,” he said he, too, was chagrined at Republican leaders’ involvement in the race. He even gently criticized a longtime ally of his, Tucker Watkins, chairman of the Fifth District Republican Committee, for what he views as Watkins’ tacit support of Hurt.
“The fifth district chairman should be neutral and not be for one candidate or another,” Goode said. “He’s not neutral. He’s working very hard. Being neutral is also not being against other candidates.”
I think Tucker, Boyle, and others have a higher standard of behavior they need to be held to as members of the Republican Party in the 5th District. Their job is to be fair and balanced during the primary and work to keep this “cirus” under control. So far t heir actions have been a disappointment.