I sat down this weekend and did some initial investigation into the remaining candidates for the 3rd Congressional District. The results are disappointing. In the end, I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to vote for any of these people. That's a valid conclusion to come to, but a rather sad one as well.
I have four candidates that I am considering, and four that I have eliminated from consideration.
Candidates I Am Considering
These candidates all have negatives, but I haven't eliminated them yet, nor have I distinguished which one I would prefer. Elimination may require more information, or simply some more thought.Joe Buchman: Libertarian. His vocal UFO enthusiasm makes it hard to take him seriously.
Jason Christensen: Independent American Party. Inarticulate, and stumbling. He seems to have adopted an interest in the Constitution, but it is not clear that he has much depth of understanding. He does not appear to demonstrate good critical thinking skills or depth.
Sean Whalen: A life coach for men and former property investor. He has obviously put resources into his campaign and he presents himself very well. Past complaints about his property investment business are cause for concern. The overall impression that I am left with is that he is a self-promoter at heart. This is a good fit for politics, even if concerning from a possible corruption standpoint. Among impossible third party campaigns, one of the many motives for running is self-promotion to improve existing businesses, and this motive is the one I would ascribe to Sean Whalen. If he was to have run against John Curtis in the Republican primary, he might have been a shoe-in for the position he's running for.
Russell Paul Roesler: There is very little information available regarding this candidate.
Candidates I Am Not Considering
I've already looked into these candidates enough to know that I would not vote for them. (Most of them didn't require much research to come to that conclusion.)Kathie Allen: Democrat (A party with a platform incompatible with my principles.)
Jim Bennett: United Utah Party. This took some investigation. My impression of the party was initially negative, and after review, that didn't really change. There are a number of good platform points, but there is not any interest shown in any solid principles, and there are some disturbing points in their priorities. There are enough red flags that I would be disinclined to support any of their candidates.
Brendan Phillips: Green Party (A party with a platform incompatible with my principles.)
John Curtis: Republican. Good party, bad candidate. He is clearly not interested in fundamental principles, whether constitutional or otherwise. Collaboration with leftists to promote his campaign, and his use of the signature gathering method to insert himself into the Republican primary, flag him as more interested in himself than in defending our freedoms.
Comments
Post a Comment