General

Schmidt vs. McEwen: Here’s how it’s going to work

When deciding who to vote for in a GOP Primary, it all comes down to about three things (more if I think of more).

Votes on issues: Does the candidate take conservative principles on moral and economic issues? Bonus if the candidate understands and supports the 10th amendment in a federal election (this very rarely happens).

Electability: Will the candidate carry their district in the general?

Advancing the cause: Does electing this candidate move conservatism forward or backward?

In the 2005 special election to replace Portman, between the four big names, Jean was the closest match for me, but Brinkman was close. DeWine and McEwen were both out in advancing the cause. Brinkman I felt wouldn’t work well with House leadership, and that left Schmidt who seemed conservative enough.

That was an open contest. Now McEwen is trying to throw Schmidt out and take her place. Why? I don’t know, but I highly suspect it has everything to do with restarting McEwen’s career. That and quite a few people are executing personal vendettas against Jean Schmidt. Which is fine I have no problem with that, but if you don’t have anything particularly against Jean, you shouldn’t let that sway you.

So, In order to get my vote, McEwen must convince me that he is more conservative, more electable, and electing him is a win for conservatism. The personal stuff should stay out of it.
Votes on Issues: Jean had the one disappointing sales tax vote and has voted consistently conservative while in Congress so far. All in all impressive conservative record. McEwen voted conservative in the 80’s with a few missteps as well. Neither of them are perfect, but pretty darn close. One big negative against McEwen is his on the record promise to bring in pork for the 2nd district. That’s not conservative.
Electability: In this district the (R) will win hands down. Electability is a non-issue in this campaign.

Advancing the cause: This is the issue on which reasonable people can disagree between these two candidates. There has been dirt dredged up on both these folks. Partisans will argue that their guy is cleaner and point to the dirt on the other side. And vice versa. By advancing the cause I also mean that the candidate makes conservatism stronger. Right now, that’s a wash. I think neither candidate has much of a future beyond the 2nd district, so that’s not the issue. I also think that Jean has become a whipping gal for the liberals, but that’s a plus for me. Just as Newt Gingrich and GWB have been whipping boys. Advancing the cause does NOT mean getting pleasing response from liberals and liberal outlets.

So, to get to the point. Here’s how it’s going to work. McEwen and his peeps need to convince me that he is more conservative than Jean and is a better representation of conservatism. Any dirt on McEwen’s side is newsworthy because it will prove that he never should have challenged Jean. He is not better than her, and might be worse.

Any dirt on Jeans side is newsworthy if it a: impact her electability, or b: her votes on issues. or c: is worse than McEwen’s dabbles with Scamway, his check-bouncing fiasco, or his 12 year stint of lobbying for foreign interests. So far we haven’t hit that bar yet.

For what it’s worth I’d like to hear from Jean on the Resume thing, but in light of the above, it’s not the type of thing that would make me switch my vote.

In anticipation of expected response in the comments, I’m all about advancing conservatism, not individual candidates, and this stupid conservative on conservative primary isn’t getting it done.

© 2006 NixGuy.com.