The election guide is inserted in today's (Sunday, April 29) paper. I'd give you a link to it, but the KDH web site is down.
There's not much new, but it's probably worthwhile to review what the candidates have to say. A few have increased their depth of understanding (or at least their ability to convey it) since the forums a few weeks ago. Juan Estrada still has a secret plan to save the city.
Nothing I read changed my mind about my short list of candidates (see last night's blog).
One trap you might fall into if you skim the candidates responses (which in some cases you will be tempted to do). The length of the response has little to do with the content. The questions asked by the newspaper were ones that can be answered generally or specifically. The paper required responses be limited to 100 words. Some candidates, apparently despairing of meeting that limit with specific answers chose to give general answers, or at least unadorned ones. A couple of the candidates are good writers -- Dan Corbin, for one -- and were able to cram good, extensive answers into the limited space. Others didn't try. My own preference is for clear answers, short or long, and I was mostly satisfied with what I read from Workman, Corbin, Okray, Kott, Foster, Blackstone, Cossey and Butler.
No comments:
Post a Comment