No Wasting Votes!

(Warrenton, IN)- This year, there is no reason to play the game of Prisoner's Dilemma with your vote. The lesser of two evils isn't a factor, because it's already clear who will win the big races come November 4.

Per Rasmussen, Obama has been ahead of McCain or tied nationally for 33 straight days, and has Obama ahead in Electoral votes by a 286-174 count.

Don't like Rasmussen? Zogby has the Electoral count at 273-163, for Obama. That leaves 102 'unsure', but Indiana is among the unsure. If McCain can't take Indiana, he can't take much. Zogby also shows Obama leading for 14 straight days. It might have been more, but the report only shows 14 days.

If you are libertarian, pro-free market, pro-individualist, anti-tax, anti-socialism, there is nothing to gain in voting against Obama at this point. He's going to win, and besides, McCain hasn't proven himself to be libertarian, pro-free market, pro-individualist, anti-tax, or anti-socialist. Vote for Bob Barr! When you give your vote to a candidate who makes no promise to deliver for you what you want, you tell him and his party that they can safely take you for granted.

Likewise, the various polls for Indiana Governor show Mitch Daniels comfortably ahead of Jill Long Thompson. Pollster.com has an aggregate poll with Daniels up 51%-37.5%.

Daniels is going to win in a landslide. No worries about 'wasting your vote' here, either. Vote for Andy Horning and boost the numbers for the Libertarian agenda of constitutional government, smaller and less intrusive government, lower spending, and lower taxes. Even with Daniels claiming 51%, a Horning return of 13-14% will open eyes and make the other parties sure to co-opt some important parts of his message.

Those who fall for the Prisoner's Dilemma approach to voting are suckers, anyhow. Don't want socialism? Then why vote for candidates who bring to to you at a clip of 75% of what they other team will do? You're still getting the thing you don't want by voting for the lesser of two evils.

Indiana Governor Fundraising Notes

(Fishers, IN)- The Indy Star had an interesting report on the fundraising efforts of the three candidates for Indiana governor. Here are the bottom lines:

Mitch Daniels (R): raised $3.37 million + in 2008, through reporting period
Jill Long-Thompson (D): $2 million + in 2008
Andy Horning (L): $500 in 2008

You get what you pay for, and sadly, Andy Horning isn't going to be getting any notice in a year where the media is going to be clogged with competing messages from the other two, in addition to the presidential candidates. I ran a very active statewide campaign in 2006 for Secretary of State, making more than 200 campaign appearances across the state. I spent some $40,000, mainly on radio ads. The results? I received fewer votes than Rebecca Sink-Burris, our candidate for SOS in 2002. The lesson? Appearances mean nothing. Paid media, hence name recognition, is everything. Make of that what you will, but that's the lesson.

Other notes:

Long Thompson got a big chunk of her money from two sources: the Service Employees International Union, which gave her $700,000 from January through June and has given her campaign a total of $1.225 million; and Emily’s List, the Washington-based group that backs female candidates who support abortion rights, which gave $400,000.

More than half her money from two lobbies? Don't Democrats normally complain about this sort of thing? Or, is it more important just to win?

Daniels’ biggest single source of income in this latest report? The more than $40,000 in interest his campaign funds earned sitting in Fifth Third Bank.

I actually kind of snickered when I read this. Don't know why. It just seemed funny. I wonder if seeing this comparison in print will nudge the Daniels campaign in the direction of tapping special interest money? I haven't had much positive to say about Daniels, but I respect the fact that he isn't getting money in big gobs from groups that would certainly want a return on their investment.

Now Andy- Please, start asking for contributions. Your message is worthy. Don't relegate it to being the tree that falls in the forest with nobody around to hear it. Dissatisfaction with Rs & Ds is indeed great, but overcoming the Wasted Vote Syndrome won't happen by accident.

Good For Indiana?

(Fishers, IN)- While so many are delighted by the interest shown in Indiana's upcoming primary, thanks to the close Democratic presidential contest, I have yet to think it a positive. Bill Ruthhart's article in this morning's Indy Star is just the article I've been waiting for and expecting to see. Ruthhart's first paragraph says it all:

Indiana's presidential primary has attracted a spotlight so bright that many Hoosiers remain blind to other key races on Tuesday's primary ballot.

Of course, who will be the next president is important. But, what goes on in my state is important, too. The candidates for president are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to get their message out. If you don't know what Obama or Clinton are about by now, you haven't tried. And yet, they get all of the press attention. On the other hand, what do you know about Shellinger or Thompson? If you aren't a political junkie, do you even know their first names? Or even their party?

Races for governor and Congress normally would be a top draw for Indiana's voters and media outlets, but instead candidates in those races have scrambled to be heard over the noise of the presidential contest.

"It is impossible to break through and get any attention on a day when the presidential campaigns are here," said Jennifer Wagner, press secretary for gubernatorial candidate Jim Schellinger. "The presidential race has sucked all the air out of the room, and it's really frustrating."

That's amusing in one tiny way, that the top of the Democratic ticket is making it hard for the Democratic gubernatorial candidates. As ever, that's an unintended consequence. As ever, unintended consequences can be worse than the "benefits" from which they came.

The bottom line is that the people of our state really aren't any better informed about state politics than in years when the primaries here are non-factors. It may even be worse. Instead of light turnout, we'll have heavy turnout by people who don't know what their voting on.

More quotes, about the "media coverage" candidates for governor are "getting":

A Schellinger rally late last week at a Southside union hall was a prime example.

Obama and Clinton were campaigning in Indiana, so only about 30 people heard Schellinger speak.

Normally, such an appearance would draw heavy media coverage and a higher turnout, but the only other reporter in attendance (aside from the one with The Indianapolis Star) was from The New York Times. That reporter's assignment: to write a story about the lack of attention on Indiana's other races.

See that? They notice the phenomena even in the New York paper. In terms of our vote for the very important state and local offices, we'd be far better off without the Obama-Clinton horse race obscuring these contests.