Absurdity and Politics

Gotcha! Bet you thought I was going to point out some of the absurdities that exist in politics. Instead, just a couple of thoughts to share today, not really related, as one might think from the title.

1. Absurdity - I was driving along Dowlen Rd yesterday when I saw a "For Sale By Owner" sign. Now there's nothing unusual about that. I've seen those signs in front of houses, on cars and boats, by rather large things for sale for years. Yesterday I began to wonder, do you really think a thief would post a sign saying "For Sale By Thief" or "For Sale By Scam Artist"? Aren't you actually supposed to own the item before you can sell it? By definition, isn't any sale which occurs, whether using an agent or doing it yourself, "by owner"? Aren't those signs just plain absurd, then?

2. Politics - Last night I watched 90% of the county judge debate between Ron Walker and Billy Job (my stupid internet connection slipped into oblivion for about 10% of the debate). While watching the debate online, you could also make/read live comments from others watching the debate. The two juxtaposed gave the experience a twist. There was one person online who is an adamant Walker supporter. She kept "score" throughout the debate and continually noted how "Walker won that one" or commented on how he was really winning the debate and, in my mind, seemed to be at odds with what I was witnessing on the screen.

The Enterprise online poll/commentary about the debate comes in at a draw: 5 in favor of Walker, 5 in favor of Job. For those who commented on Walker's behalf, many (but not all) knew at least something about him and were supporting him more on the basis of that information (things like "isn't a puppet" and "has experience"), which wasn't evident from the actual interaction of the debate. For those who commented on Job's behalf, the choice was based on what was actually said during the debate.

I know neither of these men, nor did I have any opinion prior to the debate. Walker blew it completely for me when, instead of asking Job a hard-ball question about positions or governing during his opportunity to ask any question of his opponent, he asked how Job's family was doing. Not a bad question to ask; however, it's timing was waaaaaaaaay off. More appropriate for after the debate. Job's answers to questions had a fairly good grasp of what would be expected of the position and that he'd thought through some of the potential difficulties.

When watching a debate, appearances do have an affect on how one interprets and rates responses. Walker appeared exhausted and, to me, had difficulty putting his thoughts in order. I have to admit, not everyone does well in such a public forum, but that's what we're asking county judges to do: be part of a public forum on a daily basis. His demeanor appeared to express a sense of uncertainty and a part of me thought he was actually hoping to lose. Not a good impression for a candidate who wants to win. Perhaps that's one of the hazards of a long campaign, since Walker noted more than once that the past 22 months had been difficult. He had a primary election as well as the general election to work through, while Job ran unopposed in the primary.

In the interest of fairness, I'm not going to base my vote entirely on last night's debate. However, if the candidates appear to be almost equal in abilities and commitment to the position, Mr. Job has my vote.