{"id":48612,"date":"2014-11-04T07:00:35","date_gmt":"2014-11-04T13:00:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=48612"},"modified":"2014-11-03T19:42:45","modified_gmt":"2014-11-04T01:42:45","slug":"100-reasons-im-voting-almost-straight-ticket-gop","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=48612","title":{"rendered":"100 Reasons I’m Voting Almost<\/i> Straight-Ticket GOP"},"content":{"rendered":"

I do this every election.\u00a0 I’ve got 100 reasons I’m voting a straight Republican ticket.<\/p>\n

And Mitch ain’t one.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Minnesota House District 65A<\/strong>:\u00a0 I’m voting Anthony Meschke<\/strong><\/span> for US House because he’s the most aggressively pro-liberty candidate I’ve met in recent years.<\/li>\n
  2. And yet he didn’t take the intellectually-onanistic path of joining the Libertarian Party.\u00a0 More on them below.<\/li>\n
  3. He’s got a lot of great ideas on how to scale back government’s dominance over your life.<\/li>\n
  4. Because while\u00a0I’d never smoke pot (I’m not a mellow, laid-back, hallucinogenic person; I’d be more a cocaine kinda guy, if it didn’t destroy your health and your finances), Anthony will push to legalize it – which is not the panac\u00e6a some of the more obnoxious pot activists say it’ll be, but it’ll certainly end a lot of inner-city crime.<\/li>\n
  5. And even though I don’t smoke cigarettes, Anthony’s platform also advocates eliminating the state’s latest round of cigarette taxes.<\/li>\n
  6. And Rena Moran is a reliable rubber-stamp for whatever the Metrocrat DFL wants.\u00a0 That, indeed, is why she’s in office.\u00a0 She was recruited and installed entirely to be a passive “yea” vote for all of the DFL’s dumbest ideas.<\/li>\n
  7. And any vote against Rena Moran is a vote against the entire Saint Paul DFL machine – and as such, a little spark of hope.<\/li>\n
  8. Because that DFL machine is in the process of turning Saint Paul into a cold Flint.<\/li>\n
  9. And if I didn’t live in 65A, I’d be out there voting for any of the other excellent GOP candidates in the 4th CD\u00a0– especially Stacey Stout, Heidi Gunderson, Randy Jessup, John Heyer, John Quinn<\/strong><\/span>, and Lukas Czech<\/strong><\/span>.<\/li>\n
  10. And if I lived across the river in the 2nd CD, I’d vote for Andrea Todd-Harlin<\/strong><\/span> and Jen Wilson<\/strong><\/span> in Eagan, and Roz Peterson<\/strong><\/span> in Burnsville, as many times as the law would permit.<\/li>\n
  11. Oh, hell – statewide.\u00a0 Vote GOP for House. All of them.<\/li>\n
  12. In the 4th Congressional District<\/strong>, I’m voting for Sharna Walgren<\/strong><\/span> because Betty McCollum is and remains a reliable rubber stamp for Barack Obama.\u00a0 Or Nancy Pelosi.\u00a0 Or a stuffed bear, if someone tells her it’s her boss.<\/li>\n
  13. And because while Betty McCollum is mainly focused on pleasing her masters at a national level, Sharna will actually represent the district.\u00a0 <\/em><\/li>\n
  14. Because after six decades in office, the biggest thing Betty McCollum can point to as an “accomplishment” is nattering about the National Guard advertising at NASCAR races.<\/li>\n
  15. And because Sharna has actually accomplished things in the private sector.<\/li>\n
  16. And Betty hasn’t been in the private sector since before she started at Saint Kate’s.<\/li>\n
  17. And because the Independence Party candidate’s campaign seemed to be entirely based on unicorn dust.<\/li>\n
  18. No, seriously – in a world where ISIS is slaughtering people, the economy is in the toilet, our debt is booming, our entitlement bubble is about to explode,\u00a0and our healthcare system is a self-inflicted shambles, one of the IP candidate’s top priorities is…legalizing marijuana.\u00a0 While i’m fine voting for un-serious candidates, too much is too much.<\/li>\n
  19. Because Betty McCollum is the very definition of “Washington Status Quo”…<\/li>\n
  20. …and I think Sharna can help change that.<\/li>\n
  21. And needless to say, if you’re a Republican living outside the Fourth – well, lucky you.\u00a0 Please vote early and often for Doug Dagget<\/strong><\/span> if you live in CD5.\u00a0 He’s worked 10 times harder than Keith Ellison in this race; in a just world, he’s have the same vote margin.<\/li>\n
  22. …or Torrey Westrom<\/strong><\/span> if you’re up in the 7th CD; Torrey could score one of the great upsets ever tomorrow, with a little luck and a tailwind.<\/li>\n
  23. …or\u00a0\u00a0Stewart Millsif you live in CD8; officially putting “The Range Is Blue” to bed forever would be sweet.<\/li>\n
  24. I have little doubt that John Kline<\/strong>, Erik Paulsen<\/strong><\/span> and Tom Emmer<\/strong><\/span> will win; Emmer, perhaps, by three digits.<\/li>\n
  25. Or Jim Hagedorn <\/strong><\/span>if you’re in CD1<\/li>\n
  26. Because if Mills, Westrom and Emmer win – all of them eminently possibly – Minnesota’s congressional delegation will be 5-5, as it should be.\u00a0 For now.<\/li>\n
  27. For Supreme Court of Minnesota<\/strong>, I’m going to vote for Denny Crane<\/strong><\/span>.<\/li>\n
  28. That’s right.\u00a0 William Shatner’s character from Boston Legal.<\/li>\n
  29. Darth Lillehaug is one of the most wretchedly biased liberal lawyers you can imagine.\u00a0 He was a terrible US attorney, he’s been a relentless DFL upsucker.<\/li>\n
  30. Oh, yeah – and he put the “own” in “crony<\/a>“.<\/li>\n
  31. And if they ever hold Nuremberg tribunals for enemies of the Second Amendment (and I do not advocate any such thing!), Lillehaug’ll be sitting in the Von Ribbentrop seat.\u00a0 Nobody who values the Second Amendment should vote for Darth Lillehaug.<\/li>\n
  32. But wait!\u00a0 There’s a GOP candidate!\u00a0 Why aren’t I voting for Michelle MacDonald?\u00a0 It’s not so much that I have anything against Michelle McDonald as a lawyer – although her attempt to sue the Minnesota GOP was summarily dismissed<\/a>\u00a0because no matters of law were actually found in the petition, which isn’t necessarily the mark of a crackerjack lawyer, or so I’m told. \u00a0I’m no lawyer. \u00a0What do I know?<\/li>\n
  33. I do have my concerns, I should say just between the two of us, about someone who walks around holding a video camera in front of her everywhere she goes.\u00a0 That’s a personal thing, but I’d be lying if I say it didn’t effect my impression of the woman.<\/li>\n
  34. My biggest problem, however, is with how she was nominated to run.\u00a0 The GOP Judicial Elections Committee (JEC) – a group of people who were elected by I have no idea who, and who met I have no idea where – endorsed her,\u00a0knowing <\/em>that she had an upcoming DUI trial.\u00a0 They opted not <\/em>to inform the delegates at the convention that this was the case.\u00a0\u00a0They just marched her onstage, demanded an acclamation vote from a crowd of delegates many of whom (like me) really resent the hours of our lives we’ve spent listening to the ineffectual, cronyistic Judicial Elections Committee babbling on and on and on and on, , and that had just spent a day and a half resolving an intensely fractious Senate endorsement, and was looking ahead to sorting out a five-way donnybrook for Governor.\u00a0 So about 3\/4 of the delegates cheered on cue, and about 1\/4 abstained, and there we were!<\/li>\n
  35. And in the days after the news came out about MacDonald’s upcoming case spilled in – inevitably – the media, the behavior of the JEC’s members filled me with contempt.<\/li>\n
  36. Which only got worse come State Fair time.\u00a0 When Michelle MacDonald tried to bum-rush the booth at the state fair, surrounded by a phalanx of codgers from the JEC who stonewalled requests for basic information from fellow Republicans.\u00a0 <\/em><\/li>\n
  37. I’ll sum it up; the JEC people that slipped MacDonald’s nomination past a group of ass-numbed delegates are worthy only of contempt – and the GOP should do its best to eliminate the JEC and handle all nominations through the Nominations Committee.<\/li>\n
  38. And so rather than vote for the loathsome Lillehaug or the skittery MacDonald (and thus rewarding the duplicitous committee that rammed her past the convention), I’m going to vote for a fictional lawyer.\u00a0 And I hope everyone in Minnesota does too.<\/li>\n
  39. For Secretary of State<\/strong>, I’m voting for Dan Severson<\/strong><\/span>.<\/li>\n
  40. In fact, I’m going to do so, ironically, as many times as Mark Ritchie will let me get away with it.<\/li>\n
  41. Severson is a sharp guy with much better ideas for the office than his opponent.<\/li>\n
  42. Because Minnesota is rife with voter fraud, and Severson is the guy to fix it.<\/li>\n
  43. Because elections are only half the job.\u00a0 Minnesota’s Secretary of State’s office also handles business incorporations.<\/li>\n
  44. And under DFL control, that’s turned into a Romanian Cluster-Cuddle.<\/li>\n
  45. In short, someone is going to need to put on a hazmat suit when they go into that office.\u00a0 Dan is the guy to fix things.<\/li>\n
  46. I’m voting Scott Newman<\/span> for Attorney General<\/strong>, because the AGO should not be a vehicle for cheap political points.<\/li>\n
  47. And that’s exactly how Lori Swanson, and her mentor Mike Hatch, have treated that office for almost a generation now.<\/li>\n
  48. And there are actual jobs that need to be done out there.<\/li>\n
  49. For State Auditor<\/strong>, I’m voting for Randy Gilbert<\/strong><\/span>.\u00a0 He’s an actual accountant…<\/li>\n
  50. …and not a political hack like Rebecca Otto.<\/li>\n
  51. Minnesota needs a watchdog for its state government.\u00a0 Rebecca Otto is the DFL’s partisan lapdog.<\/li>\n
  52. Why Not Third Parties?<\/strong>:\u00a0 I’ve had people throw this out there.\u00a0 Why won’t I vote for a third party?\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Partly because I believe it’s a waste of my vote.<\/li>\n
  53. “But a vote for the major parties is also a waste!”.\u00a0 Well, I disagree, but even if it’s true, I’m no worse off than you are, am I?<\/li>\n
  54. Fact is, I did the third-party thing, from 1994-1998.\u00a0 It made me feel good, compromising none <\/em>of my principles in my political life.\u00a0 Then I realized – sitting resplendently above it all not only affected no policy whatsoever (no Libertarian is ever going to\u00a0 hold any significant public office).\u00a0 I realized that the path to make the GOP jibe with my principles and thence go forward to make people free (or more free)\u00a0would be easier than the one to get the Libertarian Party into a position to affect actual policy – to make people more free.<\/li>\n
  55. “But what about Jesse Ventura!”\u00a0 Proves my point.\u00a0 He was elected in Minnesota’s great prank on itself – and then had to run to Roger Moe and the DFL majorityi in the Senate to get anything done.\u00a0 The “Independence Party” because “DFL Lite”.<\/li>\n
  56. Don’t get me wrong – in a perfect world, I could see voting for Hannah Nicollet, the IP’s candidate.\u00a0 I probably agree with her on 80% of issues, and probably 100% of issues that matter to me (shaddap about marijuana).<\/li>\n
  57. But the world’s not perfect, and my <\/em>vote for Hannah Nicollet would be one less vote that Jeff Johnson – with whom I also agree well in excess of 80% of the time – is going to need to shock the world tomorrow.<\/li>\n
  58. Oh, yeah – Nicollet seems pretty sharp.\u00a0 But I’ve been distinctly unimpressed by the rest of the IP slate when I’ve heard them.<\/li>\n
  59. And don’t get me started on the Libertarians.\u00a0 They’ve added a veneer of annoying slickness that the LPM never had when I was in the party – but they’re still preaching pure principle, which is another way of saying “simple answers to complex questions that will never ever be tested in real life”.\u00a0 And I say that as a sympathizer and former party member and candidate!<\/li>\n
  60. For US Senate<\/strong>, then, I’m voting for Mike McFadden<\/strong><\/span>.<\/li>\n
  61. Al Franken has been a reliable hyperpartisan.<\/li>\n
  62. While I was an Ortman supporter until the convention (quietly so, as it is prudent for me to be), that was no swipe at Mike.\u00a0 He’s clearly an accomplished guy.<\/li>\n
  63. And the Democrats’ swipes at McFadden have been as groaningly disingenuous as ever; they’ve tried to paint him as a Wall Street bankster, while trying to ignore the Franken Family’s ties to Lazard.<\/li>\n
  64. McFadden’s a businessman.\u00a0 Franken is an entertainer – or was, I guess.\u00a0 Who belongs more in Washington?<\/li>\n
  65. Think of all the establishments that’ll wet themselves if Franken loses?<\/li>\n
  66. The Twin Cities and Beltway DFL elites?<\/li>\n
  67. Hollywood liberals?<\/li>\n
  68. The coastal “intelligentsia?”<\/li>\n
  69. The mainstream media?\u00a0 They’ll all be completely outraged.\u00a0 And that alone will be worth it.<\/li>\n
  70. Because the only thing standing between us and “Supreme Court Justice Eric Holder”, or worse,\u00a0is a Republican-controlled Senate.\u00a0\u00a0 Seriously – even Susan Collins is a useful firebreak against that madness.<\/li>\n
  71. Indeed, harshing Obama’s mellow is an utterly justifiable end
    \n    \"\"<\/a><\/li>\n
  72. While McFadden flubbed on the “gun show loophole” issue early in the campaign – result, I’m sure, of K-Street focus group testing that showed suburban soccer moms were uneasy about “gun violence” – I think he’s made up for it.<\/li>\n
  73. And even if he hasn’t completely?\u00a0 An imperfect conservative is a more receptive audience, and a better prospect for conversion, than any Democrat.<\/li>\n
  74. A conservative Senate is a good start toward saving this nation’s foreign policy.\u00a0 Not as good as a conservative President…<\/li>\n
  75. …but that’s what the next four years is for.<\/li>\n
  76. And For Governor?<\/strong>:\u00a0 There is no doubt I’ll be supporting Jeff Johnson<\/span><\/strong>. He is the best guy for the job.<\/li>\n
  77. Indeed, he may be the best Gubernatorial candidate I’ve ever seen.\u00a0 I was an Emmer fan – but Johnson is even better.<\/li>\n
  78. For all of you sick of “compromising” – Johnson is not.\u00a0 He’s as conservative a fiscal rep as you can find.<\/li>\n
  79. How conservative?\u00a0 He ran the “Hennepin County Taxpayer Watchdog” blog for years – and in it, he was exactly that; a ferocious watchdog for fiscal sanity.<\/li>\n
  80. Seriously – if the Henco Commission had had more of him, the Twins might have paid for their own damn stadium.<\/li>\n
  81. I think he’s done an excellent job of tying together the different strands of the GOP; liberty people, socialcons, business conservatives, all can get behind the guy.<\/li>\n
  82. Because while Mark Dayton may be a decent human being, I do not believe he’s capable of governing<\/a>.<\/li>\n
  83. And I don’t think the DFL thinks so, either.\u00a0 That’s why Tina “The Butcher” Flint Smith has replaced Yvonna whatsherface as Lieutenant Governor.\u00a0 She’s going to be in place to take over.<\/li>\n
  84. And let’s be honest; Dayton has never really been governor.\u00a0 He is a talking sock puppet for the Alliance for a Better Minnesota and its main constituents; the government unions, the environmental lobby, and the teachers union.\u00a0 He is a marionette, not a governor.\u00a0 Replacing him with Tina Flint Smith would really only be a formality.<\/li>\n
  85. Because the Alliance for a “Better” Minnesota deserves a sound electoral rebuke.<\/li>\n
  86. As do some of the pundits that’ve been trying to drum up a pro-DFL, anti-GOP “bandwagon effect”.<\/li>\n
  87. Indeed – “upsetting the narrative” alone is enough reason for me to vote for Johnson.<\/li>\n
  88. Because Jeff Johnson gets economic growth.<\/li>\n
  89. And to Mark Dayton, it’s just an academic concept.<\/li>\n
  90. And Mark Dayton (and his supporters) think “economic growth” includes “government dependence”.<\/li>\n
  91. Because Jeff Johnson crushed Dayton in every single debate without breaking a sweat.<\/li>\n
  92. Because Mark Dayton went to Yale, but you’d never know it by his accomplishments.<\/li>\n
  93. Because Jeff Johnson went to Georgetown, and his accomplishments show it,\u00a0but you’d never know it by talking to him; he doesn’t jam it down your throat.<\/li>\n
  94. Because Mark Dayton’s behavior could be called “passing the buck” if you’re feeling charitable, and “not knowing what he’s doing” if you’re not.<\/li>\n
  95. And I don’t see Jeff Johnson ever trying to pull that.<\/li>\n
  96. Because it’ll put the Strib Editorial Board and MPR’s management on suicide watch.<\/li>\n
  97. Because Mark Dayton routinely evades all media access (scrutiny is obviously not in the cards)…<\/li>\n
  98. …while Jeff Johnson has no reason to.<\/li>\n
  99. And I’ve thought so for a long time. I remember interviewing him when he ran for Attorney General in 2006, and thinking “this guy could be governor”. I love being proven right.<\/li>\n
  100. And Minnesota could use a break for some competent government, all up and down the line.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    See you at the polls.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    I do this every election.\u00a0 I’ve got 100 reasons I’m voting a straight Republican ticket. And Mitch ain’t one. Minnesota House District 65A:\u00a0 I’m voting Anthony Meschke for US House because he’s the most aggressively pro-liberty candidate I’ve met in recent years. And yet he didn’t take the intellectually-onanistic path of joining the Libertarian Party.\u00a0 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[121,6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48612","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-campaign-14","category-mitch"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48612","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=48612"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48612\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":48847,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48612\/revisions\/48847"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=48612"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=48612"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=48612"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}