I was supportive of McKenna until he put on the tea-party hat.
This here is the problem. Why does it matter what political hat one is wearing? McKenna was one of the more reasonable candidates for governor this state has seen in a while. But people in these parts are so fixated on party that they will pick a worse candidate they probably like less as long is the person aligns with their “team”. Does anyone here truly think Inslee has done a better job in office than McKenna would have? From my perspective, the quality of life in Washington has declined in a variety of metrics during his tenure.
As far as who would be better in the long run for salmon, fishing and hunting it is hard to say, but I’m inclined to believe McKenna would be better for sportsmen and opportunity.
Ferguson is terrible and even worse than Inslee. My fear is he will be our next governor because he is a (D) and some people can’t fathom the idea of voting for an (R) even if they are a considerably better candidate.
Streamer
For many voters, yes, political party does matter. But I think a lot more care about positions on issues. And I think that is where McKenna lost. Anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage is never gonna' fly in mostly liberal WA state even if fiscal conservatism were the next priority. Those were deal breakers for me, and I don't even have a dog in the abortion or gay fights.
Regarding hunting and fishing, I don't think either Party much cares. The hook and bullet fraternity is just too small of a niche interest to matter in the larger scope of state politics. Both will give high quality lip service to the subject and then deliver nothing after being elected. Unless hunting and fishing dole out a hella' lotta' cash to the campiagn, that is.
I don't think any reasonable argument exists that McKenna isn't more highly skilled than either Inslee or Ferguson, but no R can win if they are in the anti-abortion and anti-gay rights camp. It's been that way in WA for at least the last 70 years.
Previous Topic
Index
