Bill’s Votes in the Primary
I’ve done it since I started in radio- announce to the BML audience how I will vote in an election.Without further delay, here are my selections in the Primary.
8th Congressional District
Representative Bill Posey is my choice here.
Bill‘s an effective, conservative congressman with experience. You won’t find him on the wrong side of a conservative issue. He’s been solid representation and that will not change.
His opponent has distinguished service in the USAF, and that is appreciated. His desire to serve is commendable and will serve us well some day, but not today. He failed to establish any reason that Posey should be removed and vows to limit his own effectiveness with a term limits pledge. He demonstrated a lack of understanding of the workings of the position he seeks and the operation of the House. While his vision for how the congress should work is utopian, it’s not the current reality. Until term limits are a reality, if they ever are, this is an unrealistic expectation for someone representing such an important area for the country as America’s gateway to space.
Florida House District 52
Challenger Matt Nye gets my vote.
Matt interviewed well and has the conservative philosophy many of us would like to see in our representatives in Tallahassee. This is a long climb for him to win. His opponent has overwhelming name recognition and electability. His longstanding service in elected office has that benefit.
Nye has long stood on the principles that conservatives appreciate, but his presentation can seem occasionally gruff or angry. He has allowed other issues outside of his own campaign to be a distraction at times and that concerns me. His mission in running was to draw clear distinction between himself and the incumbent, which are clear to those in the know, but maybe not so much to the unengaged voter.
County Commission District 3
My vote goes to Commissioner John Tobia
John has learned in this job and has represented conservative positions well.That will continue and his opponent is a far cry from being a conservative republican.John has a grasp on the countywide issues that that job requires.While his opponent is an experienced politician, her experience is limited to Melbourne and her record does not whisper, much less shout conservative.
School Board District 3
Tina Descovich has more than earned my vote and reelection to this very demanding job.She is diligent, very knowledgeable and advocates for the best practices for educating our kids.She’s been solid in her first term and Brevard deserves this kind of leadership in an underappreciated, very tough job.
Tina’s opponent committed to our on-air interview and then did not appear.She asked to reschedule and did appear on Thursday’s show where she demonstrated a lack of understanding of the political realities of an election and was hesitant to share her political leanings.What was she trying to hide?She was polite and cordial, but being a teacher does not qualify one to be in a board position.
School Board District 4
Matt Susin is clearly the better of the two choices we are provided.
I am disappointed in Susin’s closeness with the union and his visible support for it as it tried to disrupt the board and administration in contract negotiations.This pandering to the union may be for votes, but also causes me to question his priories and core philosophy.That said, he has a clear understanding of the issues, even if we don’t always agree on the actions taken.
His opponent, on the other hand, appears to be educated beyond his intelligence and had difficulty following the flow of our interview and responding to the questions presented.It was the most contentious of our candidate interviews and his aloof presence would not serve Brevard well at all.
Those selections conclude the positions for which I interviewed candidate in the Primary season.There are other races on the ballot that require our attention.Here is my take on them.
Florida House District 53
There is no valid choice for me in this race.
I did not interview these candidates.There was no need.The sitting Representative is an antagonistic person who has not served us well.Interviewing his primary opponent would have triggered the obligation on my part to bring the negativity and animosity of the incumbent into the process.His service in the House has been of self, not the constituency.Any disagreement with his positions or votes brought his wrath and false allegations to those that dared defy his positions or point to the poor choices contained in his record.
The Republican challenger made bad decisions here from the beginning.Her choice for a campaign manager appears to be based on the perception that the manager has a hatred for the incumbent.The enemy of my enemy does not necessarily make the enemy my friend.This political operative is a rookie and is not very good at his job.He’s inexperienced running a political operation and it’s never smart to hire someone who has an agenda other than the candidate’s in mind.
The challenger has education and life experience, but none in the political realm.It would take a lot of money to defeat an independently wealthy candidate and even more when that candidate is the incumbent.
The incumbent has a weak record with plenty of points to exploit for the right candidate.We just don’t have that option in this race.
I have no recommendations in these races at all and I did not interview any judicial candidates.That’s because it’s of no use to do so.Because of Cannon 7 of the Florida Bar, judicial candidates are forbidden from answering substantial questions on themselves, their political leanings or history and from committing to solid positions on anything.
The Bar would have us believe that all of these candidates are equal in all respects.They have no political leanings or activism, they are all attorneys of the same caliber and therefore there are no bad choices for voters.The Bar is partly right, there is no reason voters should try and make a choice in any of these races.They are all lawyers.They are all wonderful.They are all qualified.Or they’re not.
Until the Bar, the lawyers and candidates themselves stand up to the idiocy, there is no sense in talking to any of these folks or voting for them.