Last night the "League of Woman Voters" hosted a candidate forum in North Branch. Senate 32, House 32B, County Commissioner and School Board. Here is how I sum up the evening.
1.
First group, Commissioner Candidates, was a mix of candidates from 3
different districts. Trulson vs. Walker. Smisson vs. Robinson and
George McMahon flying solo. We can rule out McMahon from the
beginning. All though he comes across as a nice guy, he did not add
much to the content and was uncontested at the event.
Smisson did well, he gave some indication of what he would like to
implement and change. No specifics but, time did not allow for that.
He does appear to have a plan. Robinson, easily the most entertaining
of the group. Rough around the edges, not much of a public speaker. His
humor may have been a displacement of his being uncomfortable. He
seems very genuine of his intent for the county but, essentially it is
the same plan as the last 10 years. The edge goes to Smisson. A vision
of a fresh plan and doing it in a short term is refreshing and not the
norm within the Commissioner group traditionally.
Walker came
accross as disinterested. Although her message was not much different
than Robinson, her delvery was much weaker. Nothing new with her. She
was very hard to hear and sometime hard to comprehend. Trulson however
was quite the opposite. His delivery was very much that of a
politician, clear, confident and direct. His primary focus was on
inclusion and working with other. He presented himself the best.
I
place the candidates in this order: Trulson, Smisson, Robinson, McMahon
and Walker. (If you do not agree reply, if you didn't go you do not
have an opinion)
I rate the questions: C+
2. The
second group included both the Senate and House Candidates. The entire
group recieved the same questions. Barrett vs. Olseen. Nienow
vs.Noordergraf.
This one is very easy to sum up. Rather than
compare each of the races lets cut to the chase. Noordergraf has no
place on a stage with people who are educated in the affairs of
politics. Her understanding of any of the issues is weak, at best. Her
delivery is one that creates an uncertainty of her abilities. While
she may be a great "horse person" she has aboslutely no place in public
service. Her inablility to complete a thought or to articulate clealyr
would greatly concern me in a role to fight for our Senate District.
The DFL really missed the mark with this endorsement. A bad as she was,
Nienow was on the oposite side of the planet. If our President was
present to witness, he would have been happy to be facing Romney last
week. The fact that it was not a debate may have saved her from further
embarrasssment. Nienow does owe some credit to his partner in the
House. Barrett did a fantastic job lobbing the ball for Nienow to hit
out of the part. What a fantastic and unique relationship Chisago
resisdents benefit from. Barrett's answers were only hurt by the poor
layout of the program. His ability to paint a picture (with facts)
really allows his constituants to get an understanding of the work he
does in St Paul. The League seriously needs to reconsider this format
in future programs. Olseen, more of the same. I did this, I did
that. Nothing really telling what he could or could not do considering
his past experiences. He was also lucky it was not a debate. Trying to
take credit for "JOBZ" when he voted to defund it was laughable and
easy pickings if Barrett had been allowed.
I place the candidates in this order: Nienow, Barrett, Olssen and Noordergraf
I rate the questions: B- ( however, the format is wrong)
3.
School board, boy oh boy. I will be as nice as possible. The
questions were plain terrible. It did not allow for the audiance to a
get a real feel for the candidates. It actually may have been a
disservice to them. I heard the words "Ambassador and Proud" more than I
ever hope to again in my entire life. Several of the people on stage
turned it into a teacher posterior kissing party. Yikes, those folks
hopefully do not get elected. The school board is the decision making
body representing the public/taxpayer not one's to make the teachers
feel warm and fuzzy. As difficult as the program was I will give a
rating.
I place the candidates in this order: MacMillan, Salo,
Orf and Bernier ( I would only vote for the last two based on
responses, the first two articulated themselves well although I
disagreed with them often)
I rate the questions: F-
While
I will admit I am biased, I will give credit where it is due. I place
myself in the "lucky" category to be a supporter of the clear winners in
the forum. Had they not been the leaders last night this would have
been a much harder entry to write. I guess I can take a breath now!
No comments:
Post a Comment