Thursday, November 11, 2010

Murkowski vs. Miller: Scrapping Over Vote Counting

It's rather amusing (and will make for some interesting future references) to see two Republicans duking it out over what votes will count in Murkowski's write-in campaign. What's even more delicious to observe in this process is that Tea Party favorite, and actual official GOP nominee, Joe Miller, is on the side of the conflict that has to assume a legal maneuvering to discount ballots on the most flimsiest and silliest of technicalities. Really, what person with any common-sense and decency will try to discount a ballot which clearly states "Murkowski, Lisa" because it didn't read "Lisa Murkowski" as the legal fine print may seem to require? I have no dog in this hunt as the outcome is gonna be a Republican one way or the other, but it is amusing to watch. And however it works itself out, the Democrats are going to be given the gift of being able to reference any conservative Tea Party or insider-GOP talking points that emerge from the Miller-Murkowski show-down as ammunition in any of its future vote-counting/re-counting experiences with Republicans.


eric said...

I like Joe Miller over Murkowski, but I have to admit I strongly disagree w/ the decision to try to ignore votes that clearly reveal the voter's intent, even if the rules allow for it. It is an affront to Democracy, Miller should know better, and it reveals a lack of integrity that any thinking person should find troubling in a public official. I do think *most* serving politicians on either side of the aisle would reveal a similar lack of integrity if they were in the same shoes as Joe Miller, but the kind of people we need are the ones willing to put principal ahead of politics, and Miller has revealed himself to be seriously lacking here.

With that said, I always try to remind myself that Alaska is a wierd friggin' state. They are bigger than Texas, have a population about the size of Oklahoma City, and claim to be a state full of rugged individualists while relying on a collectivist state-owned oil scheme for fundage. Alaska has more cultural contradictios than the Deep South... and that's saying something. I've studied them a little and have friends who have studied them a lot, and I'm not sure that I even barely understand how Alaskans think politically.

Huck said...

Agreed, Eric, on the principle. It's an example of how power corrupts. I also agree that most politicians would likely tend to behave in a way that serves their own interests. But, you're right, too, that it's not something that preserves the spirit and integrity of the democratic impulse of our society. And I thought that this was something sacrosanct to the Tea Party principles. As kooky as Alaska may be, that's no excuse if that state wants to consider itself part of our Republic. By the way, I'm no fan of Murkowski. I think she represents the pork-barrel conservatism of Alaska's GOP that Ted Stevens came to epitomize.

narciso said...

You are polite about it, but you happen to be wrong. The way the establishment has allowed Lisa to
commandeer the state's mechanisms,
from rewriting the write in ballot
rules, which prompted the rebellion of the 150 candidates, to putting pressure to force a talk show host who is no friend of the Palin's btw, but the 'enemy of my enemy' and all that, to forcing the disclosure of confidential files, that's 'absolute power, corrupting absolutely. Not surprisingly we have seen this pattern before, a certain Senate race in a certain state in 2004