Home > Elected Officials, Uncategorized > Recommendations For The November 2nd Election

Recommendations For The November 2nd Election

By Elisha Dorfsmith

Several people have contacted me  and asked  how I will be voting in the November 2, 2010 general election. I have decided to go ahead and post a list of personal recommendations. Please keep in mind that these suggestions are mine and mine alone and do not represent any of the political groups or organizations that I work with.

I was a bit hesitant to post this list because while I adamantly support some candidates, there are many others that I begrudgingly support and will only be voting for because I have limited choices.  There is at least one race that I will leave blank because I cannot in good conscience support the candidate running.

I considered explaining my reasons for voting for (or against) each candidate and Proposition but decided not to since there is so much on the ballot and a lengthy post could take away from the purpose. Instead, I would encourage anyone who questions one of my positions to ask me in the comments section and I will gladly explain my vote. Let’s debate the candidates and issues. If you believe I’m wrong, please let me know.

With that said, here is how I plan to vote on November 2nd:

United States Senate – David Nolan

Congressional District One – Paul Gosar (Can’t bring yourself to vote for Gosar? Nicole Patti is a qualified write in candidate on the Libertarian ticket. She has not been campaigning much but she is a great protest vote).

Governor – Barry Hess

Secretary Of State – Ken Bennett

Attorny General – Tom Horne

State Treasurer – Thane Eichenauer

Superintendent of Public Instruction: John Huppenthal

Corporation Commissioner – Brenda Burns & Gary Pierce

State Mine Inspector – Joe Hart

State Representative District 2 – Frank Mulligan

Flagstaff Unified School District Governing Board – Dolores Biggerstaff & Matthew Fleece

Prop. 106 – Yes

Prop. 107 – Yes

Prop. 109  – No

Prop. 110  – No

Prop. 111 – No

Prop. 112 – No.

Prop. 113   – Yes

Prop. 203 – Yes

Prop. 301 – Yes

Prop. 302  – Yes

Ballot Question 401 – No

Ballot Question 402 – No

Ballot Question 403 – No

Ballot Question 404 – No

(Note: There are several judges that are not on my list. I am no longer making recommendations on judges).

www.flagstafflibertyalliance.com

Advertisements
  1. October 12, 2010 at 11:55 pm

    Just withdrew my endorsement of Jacqueline Hatch due to the following story:

    http://azdailysun.com/news/local/article_5a0f9339-a8ee-5fec-add6-7c1d0b302da4.html

    • Dave Howe
      October 21, 2010 at 3:06 pm

      I don’t understand your objection. The law is clear. The judge has no power to overturn a legally passed ordinance, AFAIK. Laws like this are common across the country. In most cities, they apply to ANYBODY who has property next to a sidewalk, not just businesses.

      We may sympathize with these two business owners, but their redress should be to petition council to change the law.

      If it’s an unfair or bad law, it can be rescinded by city council. Judge Hatch ruled according to the law. Are you, a libertarian, calling for activist judges? If so, you are asking for government by judicial fiat.

      Vote for Judge Hatch unless you believe she’s not fair, qualified, and honest.

      • October 21, 2010 at 4:00 pm

        Hi David,

        There are other precedents that are much newer than the one Hatch referred to in her ruling. Hatch also stepped way out of line when she mentioned the “police power” of the City as part of her reasoning. I am not calling for activist judges. You are putting words in my mouth.

        I look forward to hearing what the Arizona Court of Appeals has to say.

        Mayor Presler’s recent endorsement of Judge Hatch also played a role in me withdrawing my recommendation. Hope that helps.

        Elisha

  2. October 18, 2010 at 3:00 am

    At the Candidate forum Saturday I got asked my position on 302. All the other candidates said they we’re voting “no” to protect the social programs and continue the tobacco tax. I passed on the question saying I needed to research the issue. Sarah said I should I just went along and supported benefits for children, but was cautious. Now I see that you recommending a “yes” on 302, why is that.

  3. October 18, 2010 at 10:05 pm

    Thanks for asking Frank. My yes vote is not an enthusiastic vote. I struggled a little with this because voters passed the tobacco tax for a specific program and prop 302 ends the program but does not repeal the tax. Instead it allows the money to go to the general fund.

    I ended up voting yes because of the shortcomings of First Things First. Not only is it a redundant program (there are other programs out there that do the same thing) it is a mismanaged program. The funding has been spent on administration with very little actually reaching the kids. Secondly, I voted against it because I believe the state (and taxpayer) does not have the responsibility to start educational programs before Kindergarten (actually, even Kindergarten is not mandatory in Arizona).

    In these economic times when the state is having trouble keeping k-12 programs alive it is hard to justify spending money on additional programs that are considered by many to be a failure.

    Lastly, from a libertarian perspective, I see public schools as brainwashing factories. It bothers me that the government wants to be involved in even the very early developmental years of a child.

    All of that said, I won’t be upset if it fails. I will be kind of amused as I watch the state try to figure out where else they can cut to try to balance the budget. The last budget was passed with the assumption that voters would pass 301 and 302. That’s pretty presumptuous of our elected officials.

    Not sure how you feel about the Goldwater institute but here are some of their thoughts. I actually wouldn’t mind seeing those other programs cut too:

    http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/article/5062

  4. Louise
    October 20, 2010 at 6:06 am

    Ok, so What the He– Did Tom Horne do for the school’s… Special needs kids are still 2nd class citizen’s …. He absolutely DID NOTHING for the children of Arizona…

  5. October 20, 2010 at 2:56 pm

    Hi Louise,

    As you know, Tom Horne is now running for Attorney General. Tom Horne and Felecia Rotellini both support throwing people in prison for non-violent crimes. They both support the failed drug war, and neither believe in true individual liberty. So why support Tom Horne you ask? Honestly, I really wish I didn’t have to and there was a third party candidate running. Unfortunately, I’m stuck with two choices and I decided to support the one candidate who would most likely defend the 10th amendment and Arizona’s rights as a state. I believe that Tom Horne will stand up to the Federal Government and fight for Arizona’s rights more than Felecia Rotellini would.

    Hope that helps.

  6. October 20, 2010 at 6:26 pm

    If this turns out to be true I may have to retract my recommendation for Gosar:

    http://azdailysun.com/news/local/article_1b2c982f-ebef-52d6-891b-24f7ee485fb5.html

    If he’s afraid to stand up for his beliefs here, how can we be sure that he will stand up for us in Congress. I contacted Gosar and asked him to respond to the article. I’ll let you know what he says (if he even responds). Remember, Kirkpatrick was brave enough to go to a tea party meeting. Gosar should have the guts to do a televised debate.

    Are Gosar and Kirkpatrick really the best choices that the two major parties have to offer? Pathetic.

    • Dave Howe
      October 21, 2010 at 3:19 pm

      Really? Let’s forget about the “third option.” There is none. so the choice is between a non-lawyer who hasn’t been in politics before and a Democrat who will vote for expansion of government every chance she gets, unless her leaders give her permission to vote against them when her vote is unimportant.

      Whether she voted for all of the Obama programs or not, she clearly agrees with them and will vote to expand them. Dr. Gosar will not. He supports smaller government, lower taxes, reduced spending, less government intrusion.

      There is really no logical choice other than Gosar. And you’re worried because he chooses not to do something that doesn’t advance his campaign?

  7. October 21, 2010 at 3:37 pm

    Hi David,

    Thanks for your concern.

    Actually, Gosar does support more government intrusion. He supports the war on drugs and he supports a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage. That alone tramples on states’ rights. I already voted and I voted for Gosar. I am not enthusiastic about him. So far he has not responded to me or returned my messages.

    This has nothing to do with him advancing his campaign or not. It has to do with him committing to a debate and then backing out for a truly pathetic reason. Gosar needs to stand up and prove that he can lead. His campaign has been a joke up to this point. I do not play partisan politics. I will hold candidates from all parties accountable.

    Elisha

    • Dave Howe
      October 26, 2010 at 9:27 pm

      I appreciate your replies, Elisha. We are not far apart.

  8. October 30, 2010 at 6:06 pm

    Elisha, I see you have come in favor of Prop 109 and I’m wondering why on earth you would do so considering that the legislature is the weakest link in our system – why subject a basic right to the power of politics?

  9. October 31, 2010 at 7:36 pm

    Great, thanks Eli

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: