Notes, quotes and anecdotes about Tuesday’s election, with the polite reminder to make sure you vote:
Preening pests: I hate to sound like a cranky old coot here, but am I the only one who is annoyed by perky politicians waving signs at intersections and ringing doorbells to beg for our votes? Yeah, I know, name familiarity is important in politics, but really, is anyone more likely to vote for a candidate who stoops to these kinds of undignified and invasive tactics? If you want my vote, stop distracting motorists and stay off my porch.
Primary endorsements box score: A similar question can be asked of newspaper endorsements. Is anyone really more likely to vote for a candidate because of a newspaper endorsement? I honestly don’t know. Endorsements are opinions, nothing more. They’re conversation starters, eminently rebuttable or supportable. If you’re wondering how Columbian endorsees fared in the Aug. 18 primary, five of the seven candidates we endorsed advanced to Tuesday’s general election. That’s typical; about two-thirds to three-fourths of Columbian endorsees usually win or advance to primaries. But our goal is not a high batting average. It’s simply to opine about who we feel are the best candidates and let the votes fall where they may. The only reason I bring up the batting average is to answer critics who insist our endorsements prove we’re out of touch with voters. The record doesn’t support that contention.
Do your homework: Are you one of the many Americans who demand that politicians thoroughly read and understand bills before they vote on them? Good for you! Make them do their jobs! And I’m sure you’ll be reading the complete text of Referendum 71 — all 32 single-spaced pages in the Voter’s Pamphlet — before you vote on that measure … uh, right?