OrangeEmpire
The White Debonair
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2005
- Messages
- 74,988
- Likes
- 59
This evening I was reading a news paper and there's an interesting article right smack dab on the front page.
Homeless candidates shaking up status quo
Source: San Antonio Express News
So should the town spend the money to print out the ballots and let this guy have his day?
Personally, I don't see any difference in an 'unqualified street person' and a rich dude who owns the local car lot having a spot on the council. To me it's what America's built on and we should let any and all have at it when they try for a voted position. Equal opportunity. I pay taxes to allow this to happen. I like to think we still live in a democratic society and while the money could be spent fixing a pothole printing an extra name on a ballot or having another election is part of it.
Plus, the Kerrville homeless man has a point:
It's not like he's looking to get rich. This is a town on a highway with farming communities and a college nearby. The football team is full of rowdy cornfed boys that go to football games in their high school size tower over other smaller sized school teams from the inner city. Property taxes are less than 1000 yearly.
So what do you guys think?
Is this guy wasting time and money of a local town? Do you think democracy should be for anyone?
PS. Hillary broke fundraising records. Getting 10 mil and beating Edwards record from the 04 election run. I just threw this in to put small town politics in perspective...
Thoughts?
Homeless candidates shaking up status quo
Source: San Antonio Express News
Getting only one vote in last year's mayoral race didn't deter Bryan Demaree from running for city council — forcing officials here to spend up to $8,000 on a May election they had planned to cancel.
Minutes before the filing deadline, Demaree, an out-of-work landscaper, declared himself a write-in challenger to City Council member Todd Bock, one of two candidates who had been unopposed.
Mayor Eugene Smith decried having taxpayers foot the bill for what he described as the electoral fantasy of an unqualified "street person."
"He's not a viable candidate," Smith said of Demaree, who has netted a total of 63 votes in three council races since 2004. "If he had any hope, I'd say, 'Let's go.'"
So should the town spend the money to print out the ballots and let this guy have his day?
Personally, I don't see any difference in an 'unqualified street person' and a rich dude who owns the local car lot having a spot on the council. To me it's what America's built on and we should let any and all have at it when they try for a voted position. Equal opportunity. I pay taxes to allow this to happen. I like to think we still live in a democratic society and while the money could be spent fixing a pothole printing an extra name on a ballot or having another election is part of it.
Plus, the Kerrville homeless man has a point:
"Not having an election would cost the city a lot more," he said. "People would get apathetic, and apathy is really what we don't want in a free society."
It's not like he's looking to get rich. This is a town on a highway with farming communities and a college nearby. The football team is full of rowdy cornfed boys that go to football games in their high school size tower over other smaller sized school teams from the inner city. Property taxes are less than 1000 yearly.
So what do you guys think?
Is this guy wasting time and money of a local town? Do you think democracy should be for anyone?
PS. Hillary broke fundraising records. Getting 10 mil and beating Edwards record from the 04 election run. I just threw this in to put small town politics in perspective...
Thoughts?