"None of the Above" Kicks Butt In Nevada Senate Debate

"None of the Above" Kicks Butt In Nevada Senate Debate


I don’t know the answer to Justin’s question of whether last night’s senate debate in Nevada will swing the election, but I did watch the entire debate in stunned, silent horror. Some saw a clear-cut outcome. For me, it was all I could do to write this open letter of sincere condolence to our unfortunate fellow citizens facing this decision in Nevada:

Dear People of Nevada,

I just watched your Senate debate, and I am just so… so… sorry. I feel so bad for you. I mean – WTF?? Look, I don’t know how this happened, but you really should try and avoid choices like this in the future.

What to do? If you want to vote None Of The Above, I get it. It is a tempting, some might even say – right choice under the circumstances. But for those of you willing to “man up” and make a decision – lets take a clear eyed look at your options.

There is a real difference. You can choose between a lightweight incompetent, or a craven, duplicitous, heavyweight partisan hack incompetent. Neither is going to be good for Nevada. You should consider what is best for the country. Obama is going to be President for the next six years. My advice – take one for the team and vote for the lightweight. It is the only way to limit the damage. I’m sorry – it is just the right thing to do. Look, it’s only six years. In 2016 you can vote for a new Senator and President. Try to give yourself better choices next time.

Your Friend, MW

x-posted from “Divided We Stand United We Fall”

  • Edith H

    Well said.

  • kranky kritter

    I would like to see an option similar to “none of the above” in all elections. That option would be “confidence.” However, the way it would work is this: at some threshold level, say 15 or 20 or 30%, the election would be declared invalid, and both candidates either precluded from running in the next round, or candiates chosen from a runoff where all voters could participate (unlike primaries) and the top 2 ran in a new final.

  • blackout

    What a choice. I’m with you in extending my condolences to Nevada, mw, but then, as Thom Yorke would no doubt remind them, “You do it to yourself, you do, and that’s what really hurts.”

    I can’t back you on the recent Fiorina plug at all. Even the promise of divided government is not enough to offset the trainwreck she promises to be as a politician. Or am I reading you wrong, and you just hate California and see Fiorina as the handiest form of punishment?

  • http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/ mw

    No, I live in San Francisco, and believe our state reputation has suffered enough from the extreme politics and general arrogant idiocy of Madame Boxer. Fiorina was not my first choice for the GOP nomination, but – truth be told – the more I’ve seen her in action in interviews and debates, the more I like her. I think she will be a good senator and understands she’ll need to be on the moderate end of the Republican spectrum (a la Scott Brown) if she hopes to remain a California Senator.

    I will say that (certainly in comparison to Nevada), that I have been impressed with the quality of the debates and the choices we have here in Ca this year for both the Senatorial and Gubernatorial races. All the candidates come across as reasonably articulate and with a good detailed grasp of the issues (with Boxer the least of the four).

    I don’t have the same confidence in divided government at state and local levels as I do with the feds, so the heuristic carries less weight with me in the governors race than the Senate race. I am on the fence with Whitman/Brown and may yet vote for Brown.