Mayoral Candidates

[james weatherford]

Appreciate the good discussion.
A person has to vote one's conscience.

btw: agreed with respect to being very impressed with Ms. McCandless.

[shockwave rider]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HiloPuna

BillyB

I hope you don't get hung up on James W's use of guilt by association rejection of Wally Lau. The reason is that this is, like it or not, a two horse race in the primary. So you are either going to have a vote that is part of the electorates decision (whether we are going to extend the electoral season to the General for the Mayors race) or not. And that two horse race is Wally and Harry.

Anyone who has an argument with this is perhaps in need of a reality check....the best analogy currently would be those Bernie supporters heckling HRC on the convention floor. At some point they have to look at the real politik and participate in the most meaningful way.

I like Marlene, known Archie and her for more than 20 years. Lot's of respect.
I think Pete Hoffman is the most cogent and articulate of the candidates, and that's important to me.
But at the end of the day, given their resources and the difficulty in getting their message to the electorate, they are not going to catch up with Harry's name recognition advantage or Wally's ability to promote his campaign into a competitive position. After all, the customary first test of a candidate is their ability to build and manage a campaign.

That's just the facts.....


Due to an inordinately long spell in the publics view Harry got to skip that step, and in my opinion we suffered due to his obvious lack of administrative skills. His was a hands off, passive/aggressive leadership style that was fine so long as we were in boom times. The legacy of that was a HUGE increase in public employees.
But thats no obvious reason to elect a 77 year old man with serious health conditions whose already been there with little to show for it and offers nothing for the future except "trust me". I haven't seen anything more substantive than that from him in this campaign other than general support for TMT, geothermal, and solid waste solutions. And I know him well enough to know that he changes his mind, or doesn't speak his mind plainly, often.

---

I really don't appreciate the comparison between voting my conscience in a primary with over a dozen candidates and the heckling being done by a bunch of spoiled children at the DNC, not the same thing at all. I've generally appreciated your contributions to the political discussion but that was just insulting.

[HiloPuna]

Shockwave
I apologize for the insult, but think you've reaffirmed my point...those "spoiled children at the DNC" were/are voicing "their conscience ". Like it or not there are similarities even if not directly analogous in all cases. Your efforts to be aware and informed are what would distinguish you from those reliant on yard signs, folklore, and hearsay.

I've tilted at more than a few windmills in my life, everyone's entitled to. Sometimes though it leads to unpleasant consequences be it Mayor Bernard Akana or (gawd forbid) Pres Donald P Trump*. In that vein I hope that our County avoids the placeholder Kim administration.

* the "P" is for "pretentious", look it up ( the use of middle initials in the presentation of your name)

[shockwave rider]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HiloPuna

Shockwave
I apologize for the insult, but think you've reaffirmed my point...those "spoiled children at the DNC" were/are voicing "their conscience ". Like it or not there are similarities even if not directly analogous in all cases. Your efforts to be aware and informed are what would distinguish you from those reliant on yard signs, folklore, and hearsay.

I've tilted at more than a few windmills in my life, everyone's entitled to. Sometimes though it leads to unpleasant consequences be it Mayor Bernard Akana or (gawd forbid) Pres Donald P Trump*. In that vein I hope that our County avoids the placeholder Kim administration.

* the "P" is for "pretentious", look it up ( the use of middle initials in the presentation of your name)

---

No, not the same thing at all, the choice someone makes in the privacy of the voting booth is a completely different thing than shouting down someone like Elijah Cummings when he is giving a speech at the party convention. They are not voting their consciences, they are being rude and give progressives a bad name.

[HiloPuna]

SR

When a person primarily utilizes or rationalizes "their conscience" as a fundamental basis for decisions to they can convince themselves, or absolve themselves, of just about anything. They have become True Believers and with that unapproachable or immune to reason. While a conscience is a terrible thing to lose it's use as a deciding factor should only be after reason is exhausted. Be it in the polis or at the polls.

[shockwave rider]

If you are saying people should not use their conscience in decision making what are you suggesting they use? If a person, or group of people, solely use rationality as a basis for decision making with no conscience they can justify all manner of evil. Chemical weapons, eugenics, bombing civilians, involuntary euthanasia, allowing entire populations of countries to starve while exporting the food they grow, genocide, child labor, slavery, subjugation of women, and totalitarian governments have all been justified using reason, science, economic need, or other "rationalizations" by people who dismissed "conscience" as a guiding principle.

Back to the election, your position seems to be that since this will turn into a 2 man run-off anyway that the voters should just ignore everyone else and vote for, or against, one of them. You also declare which two are the top guys, in a place with no significant polling and a widely scattered population. So I guess we are to take your opinion as the gold standard and vote for one of the candidates you have declared worthy, or else we are just irrational "true believers" immune to reason.

My position is that in a primary race with that many candidates, no legitimate polling to determine who are the front runners, and an inevitable run off, there is no reason not to vote for the person I think would serve Hawaii County the best as mayor. As I said in my original post, I went down the list and candidate after candidate had factors that are deal breakers for me, these are things that in my mind disqualify them for the job of Mayor of Hawaii. That list of deal breakers is not a whim, it is a matter of positions or actions taken, or personal characteristics shown, that mean I cannot and will not vote for them. Somehow you expect me to vote FOR someone who I think is unqualified to do the job, just because they are in your top 2?

I watched multiple candidate forums, pay attention to the local news and government, and have met or interacted professionally with many of top candidates, my decision about who would be best for the job is based on careful thought and consideration. I think a fundamental difference in our approach is you value voting for a winner and I value voting for the person who would be best at the job.

[james weatherford]

This year, "preferential voting" (see below) is not (yet) in use.
Nevertheless, the Mayoral election certainly demonstrates the value of such a system -- which would allow voters to rank preferences from first to last.

That said, such a voting system could be adopted with amendment to the County Charter (Article XIII, Section 13-27) just like was done to change to nonpartisan elections.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV), also known as the alternative vote (AV), transferable vote, (single-seat) ranked choice voting (RCV), or preferential voting, is a voting system used to elect a single candidate from a field of more than two candidates.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

[HiloPuna]

JW,

I'd like that system, much more efficient !

shockwave,
I've thought more about my statements, and yours. I agree, in this Primary there is no reason not to support the candidate of your choice. I personally have been lobbied by my friend Paul Bryant and could as easily vote for him as Wally Lau or Marlene Hapai. And ultimately votes for any of the other candidates would make no difference should Harry Kim win the Primary with 50% + 1 vote. What's most important to me, and the basis for my initial argument, is whether we move on to a contested General between the top two vote getters (is that a word?).

Just for clarity though, when you write
" If you are saying people should not use their conscience in decision making... ".

No, that is not what I meant. I meant that in common usage "to vote your conscience" is when one must concede either a lack of rational clarity or a moment of moral truth. I Your conscience is then called upon to provide a moral touchstone or reference for resolution. I think there is ample information available to those who seek it out to make a rational, informed decision in this race. And I don't think in this race that we are at a dangerous moral, ethical, or political precipice as with our Presidential race.

My comparison of the frustrated and petulant Sanders supporters with those who think Drake Weinert is a reasonable choice for Mayor was indeed unfair. I appreciate your engagement in the process of electing our next Mayor and your participation on this forum and I apologize for making a poor argument.

HP

[BillyB]

I believe in voting for the best candidate even if they don't seem to have a chance. You can still get to vote for the lesser choices in the general if the pundits are right, however you may, just may get to vote for your first choice if everyone votes their conscience instead of trying to game the system.

If 51% of the other vote is split any number of ways we get a second vote if your first choice is eliminated. Then again 1 st choice might just go on to the general.

[opihikao]

HiloPuna wrote (to Shockwave Rider):

I appreciate your engagement in the process of electing our next Mayor and your participation on this forum and I apologize for making a poor argument.


HiloPuna, you are a class act. Well said. Mahalo for the good discussion.

JMO.