Everyone is talking about the midterm election, and for good reason. What happens on November 2nd will have a huge impact on all of us in this economically tenuous and culturally-divided time. One interesting race to watch is in Alaska, where one of the front runners is actually a write-in candidate. The New York Times reports:
Ms. [Lisa] Murkowski has defied conventional wisdom and her colleagues in the Republican establishment by waging a credible race as a write-in candidate. Analysts and Alaskans now say she could overcome the odds and logistical hurdles to win, something no senator has done since Strom Thurmond of South Carolina in 1954.
Murkowski, an incumbent, was beat out by Joe Miller, a Sarah Palin protege, in the primaries with 51% of the vote, but she’s battling back. She describes herself as a “moderate Republican”–pro-choice, active in protecting the rights of indigenous people in Alaska, and one of only five Republicans who voted for the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act. Murkowski is also the only woman ever elected to Congress from her state.
“Write in Lisa Murkowski… it’s a vote for you,” says the Murkowski campaign. Is it, really? If I used Murkowski’s “women should vote for women because they’re women” logic, I’d be voting for Sarah Palin for President in 2012 too. And that’s not going to happen.
Writing in a vote for Lisa Murkowski isn’t a vote for me. It’s a vote for Lisa Murkowski.
If it was a vote for me, it would be a vote for someone who would have been proud to vote for two bright and qualified female Supreme Court nominees who support women’s issues. Lisa Murkowski didn’t.
If it was a vote for me, it would be a vote for someone who didn’t waffle about reproductive freedom.
If it was a vote for me, it would be a vote for someone who didn’t vote against the vital interest of my state including on issues of domestic violence because my party leaders told me to.
This will be an interesting one to watch.