Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Party convention results, who cares?

Sure, it would have been nice to have come out on top.

We didn't. What now?

There is still the message;

Government should be transparently accountable
to the people.
It is still the most fundamentally important issue of all.

That is not a message you will hear from the folks who
run and attend pre-primary conventions.

The "Party of Transparent Accountability" doesn't even
have a governmental transparency plank in its platform.

Republican Party insiders, the heavy hitters that wield the power and resources, don't want anyone to take back the power they have usurped. They don't want anyone to end their illegitimate privilege any more than the heavy hitters in the Democrat Party want anyone to end their control over their political machines.

Pre-primary party conventions are about battling machines.

While there is a correlation between the power of a political machine, and the likelihood of it being able to install a candidate, there is no claim made that the process will identify the best candidate, only the one more likely to win.

Rep Janice Arnold-Jones would be a better Governor than Diane Denish, Susana Martinez, or Allen Weh.

The pre-primary convention process ignores that dimension.

In some respects, Janice Arnold-Jones is the better for the loss; birds of a different feather, don't flock together.

The most important things that Janice Arnold-Jones will do as Governor, will likely happen in a room adjacent to the Governor's Office. It accommodates an enormous round table.

The idea behind a round table, is to pretend co-equal influence at the table. In theory, no one sits at the head of the table.

In practice, added influence sits in the chair with the Governor in it.

Now imagine, seated around the table, twenty or so legislators with deeply held disparate interests.

The Governor is charged with ending the discussion in consensus.

Now imagine each of the remaining candidates sitting in the Governor's chair. How might things be different?

In the first place, if Janice Arnold-Jones is at the table,
you will be at the table as well.
The meeting will be robustly webcast to an archive.

Allen Weh will not webcast the meeting; he hasn't had a
single word to say, throughout the whole fight over webcasting.
Neither has Susana Martinez. Neither has Diane Denish.

Beyond that, the Governor is charged with facilitating the meeting.

If she has done a good job, people leave the meeting feeling that their side has been heard, the truth is on the table and, a reasonable compromise was reached.

Allen Weh cannot lead that kind of meeting. He has made it as clear as it can be made, he take his seat after first placing his baseball bat on the table in front of him.

Everyone will leave the table unsatisfied; even his "friends".

I don't know if Susana Martinez can draw consensus from opposing opinions or not. Same with Diane Denish. They are unproven in what might be considered the most important gubernatorial skill of all.

Many of Allen Weh's supporters tout his successful experience as a businessman. Susana Martinez' supporters sing praise of her success as a prosecutor.

Do we need business acumen in the Governor's seat?
Aren't the business principles involved, common knowledge?
Do we really need a rocket scientist of a business man?
Does anyone really believe that the cultures of corruption and
incompetence flow from the fact that there is no one in Santa Fe with business skills enough to end them?

And with respect to Susana Martinez' prosecutorial skills, does anyone really believe that the cultures of corruption and incompetence flow from the fact that there is no one in Santa Fe with prosecutorial skills?

The skill set that plays is legislative.

Diane Denish, arguably has a legislative skill set equivalent to Janice Arnold-Jones'. Others would argue that a ceremonial figure head, even if they occasionally cast tie breaking votes, hasn't the same experiential background as someone who has crossed the aisle on many occasions to create support for worthwhile legislation.

And then there is grace; an elemental personal trait,
utterly essential in consensus building.

The results of the pre-primary conventions don't tell the whole story, and anyone who bangs on them too loudly, does so because it's there only drum.

Rep Janice Arnold-Jones;

proven competence,

proven character,

proven courage,

and abundant grace.

photo Mark Bralley


Anonymous said...

The Fox and the Grapes comes to mind. Arnold-Jones is just enabling Diane Denish by staying in the race and drawing attention away from Republican candidates who can actually win the primary.

It's sad to see her vanity come before the party or what is good for New Mexico. This year isn't about personal feelings, but taking Santa Fe back from Democrats.

Someone should let Janice know that she isn't helping in that effort.

ched macquigg said...

You fall among Republicans that would have any Republican over any democrat. To you it is about riding a wave to victory, rather than pushing for the right victory.

In your entire attack on Janice Arnold-Jones, you could not point to single point on which to disagree with her, except that she should continue to fight for transparently accountable government. None of the other Republican candidates, not one!, has taken spoken decisively on even so simple an issue as webcasting.

The moral of the story of the Fox and the Grapes is;

"It is easy to despise what you cannot get."


You lost me.

I don't know that there is anything Janice Arnold-Jones cannot get. Nor that she despises anything but corruption and incompetence in state government.

Your suggestion that is is a matter of vanity, suggests two things; you do not know her. In which case you should attend her open office hours every Sat. or,
simply and ugly ad hominem attack. Which if you had read here very much, is music to my ears.

Thank you for the ad hominem attack and for the vindication and validation of every argument I have ever made on this subject, that your inability to challenge any of those arguments and were left with only a pathetic smear, provides.

Thanks for stopping by.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe that did not get how the sour grapes applied to you suddenly saying, "Oh, these results didn't matter."

Also, staying in a race that there is no chance of winning is the ultimate in vanity,

The point is that candidates who have no chance of winning are not doing the party or the state any favors by hanging around and helping draw attention away from candidates who actually have broad support among the party.

Arnold-Jones needs to take a good, long look in the mirror (or should it be the webcam, since that is the only accomplishment she can point to in her years as a legislator?) and ask herself if staying in the race is worth it if it enables another Democrat to win.

"I don't know that there is anything Janice Arnold-Jones cannot get."

I can think of one: 20 percent in the pre-primary convention. No candidate who has ever failed to reach 20 percent (let alone fall 7 percent short) has ever won the primary.

ched macquigg said...

I didn't suddenly point to the relative unimportance. Point to a single place where I ever argued it was. These delegates were the same people who voted for a platform with no transparent accountability in government plank, and who decided to torment gay people for another year. They're not exactly Janice's kind of people. But there are people who are her kind of people, and they are entitle to a champion.

If your candidate can't stand a little competition, how good can they be?

Your ad hominem "vanity" attack is baseless in fact. All ad hominem attacks prove is that you have no better argument to make. It is pitiful.

Imagine someone earning a medal of honor. And then someone like you asking; oh yeah, well what else did they do? You don't understand how monumental an accomplishment it was, or what kind of courage it took to take it.

You cannot even summon the courage to sign your name under the crap you write.

"Until something is done for the first time, it has never been done before" That's heavy.

You think any Republican is better than a Democrat. I think the best Republican is better than just any Republican.

You follow your champion, I will follow mine.

Anonymous said...

Your entire blog is an ad hominem attack! You are just too narrow minded and pompous to realize it. You are incapable of objectivity. That's why you will always criticize leaders but never be one.

ched macquigg said...

This from somebody who went looking for a purpose in life, and stopped looking when they got to internet troll.

Anonymous said...

Your comment does nothing to change the accuracy of my critique.

ched macquigg said...

Since you are posting from an APS computer during the work day, I am going to suppose that you are an APS administrator with nothing better to do than harass me.

You left footprints to my door, and they are part of a record you cannot destroy or even hide.

Find something better to do with your day. This is not what you are being paid to do. Or is it?