Rick Olson's change in political party meant to confuse gullible voters
In the April 29 paper, you ran an article by Tom Perkins, headlined "Republican enters 55th District race." Its subject was Republican Owen Diaz, former Milan mayor, who has thrown his hat into the ring and hopes to be elected as a state representative for that district. Problem is, the district already has a Republican state representative. So what’s a guy to do?
Sandy Schopbach
Color me old-fashioned, or quaint, or naive. But isn’t one supposed to choose the political party one votes for - and even more so, the political party one represents - by the principles that party stands for?
Some people change parties because their priorities change as life throws things at them, or blesses them. Arlen Specter may have changed his political stripes for that reason; time will tell. But some just want to stay in office, such as Mr. Lieberman from the fine state of Connecticut.
It seems to me that Mr. Olson falls into the latter category. I doubt very seriously whether Mr. Olson’s change in party would result in a change of ideology. To the contrary, I think the idea is to find gullible voters who vote by party -- in this case, Democratic -- and get them to elect you, then to enact a Republican agenda once in office.
This one sentence summarizes in a distasteful nutshell what is wrong with politics. It’s not about principles any more; it’s about manipulation. Of capturing, holding and wielding power.
This same trick was tried in a recent Wisconsin primary election by Republicans. Even a Fox News entity (Fox6now.com) said this about those "place-holder" candidates: "They are buying time - a legitimate political strategy, according to Republicans (...) The [Democratic] complaint said the candidates told petition signers they were Democrats, while preaching openly about their loyalty to the Republican Party."
Wouldn’t it be nice if you knew whether there’s sawdust filler in your hamburger or not? Wouldn’t it be wonderful if high-fructose corn syrup were still listed as such in a food’s ingredients instead of hiding under the newly-coined epithet of "corn sugar"? Wouldn’t it be admirable if you could just tell a leopard by his political spots? But those things seem to be pipe dreams in the Age of Smoke and Mirrors.
I seem to hear the Wizard of Oz shouting, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."
A graduate of the University of Michigan and the Sorbonne, Sandy Schopbach divides her time between Paris and Ann Arbor. She arranges custom-tailored tours of France for small groups of Americans. She has worked as a photographer, author, and freelance journalist, and also managed the now-defunct Bird of Paradise jazz club for a number of years. Her website is www.sandyschopbach.com.
Comments
Martin Church
Mon, May 7, 2012 : 4:46 p.m.
Perhaps it is time to fire the political parties and force everyone interested in running to compete against each other without party identification. We are not Europe, we are suppose to be voting for the person not the party. So why do we continue to support parties. It is time for the Democrats and the other parties to go the way of the wigs.
trespass
Mon, May 7, 2012 : 11:10 a.m.
When Olson announced he would run as a Democrate at the Tea Party Caucus he told the audience that he would still caucus with the Republicans if they were still in the majority. Sounds like a wolf in sheeps clothing to me and the Tea Party was not very happy about it either.
EyeHeartA2
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 5:50 p.m.
"Color me old-fashioned, or quaint, or naive. But isn't one supposed to choose the political party one votes for" I think you meant this: Color me old-fashioned, or quaint, or naive. But isn't one supposed to choose the candidate one votes for? Otherwise you sound like you don't think about your vote and just worry about the party. Sounds pretty partisan. You didn't mean that did you? Of course not.
ypsicat
Mon, May 7, 2012 : 9:37 a.m.
No, I think she meant it the way she worded it, since she is speaking to the choices of the candidate himself.
Laura Jones
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 4:56 p.m.
I am not so convinced that party affiliation means very much anymore about philosophy as much as it does about where the money stream is coming from when votes come up affecting donors who are party aligned (normally both parties). Neither party impresses me as standing for much beyond ways to line politicians pockets from corporations while their voting constituency is lulled into complacency under the mistaken belief the politician is acting in their best interests,
SonnyDog09
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 4:47 p.m.
Is this kind of like when Barack Hussein Obama runs as a Democrat and not as a Socialist?
johnnya2
Mon, May 7, 2012 : 7:43 p.m.
Other than the fact that NOTHING Obama has done comes close to socialism. In fact, I would classify Obama as slightly left of Ronald Reagan. In fact, Reagan RAISED taxes and the debt ceiling. Obama has NEVER raised taxes. In fact, in three plus years in office he has lowered taxes for 95% of working Americans through the stimulus package AND he has also had two years in a row of a payroll tax rate lowering. There has not been a single tax increase. I do hear the right wing screaming for a new Reagan era, and let's do it, but that means Reagan era taxes as well. Oh and one of the first things Bill Clinton did when he got in office was raise the income tax. Six years later, a balanced budget. Which party would you trust to balance a budget, the one that HAS, or the one that claims they would?
Dog Guy
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 4:06 p.m.
I agree. Olson's gambit is as reprehensibly duplicitous as holding a millage vote on May 8, 2012, when only those who financially benefit from millages will be voting. He should be ashamed.
Dog Guy
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 3:42 p.m.
Such political chicanery is unworthy of the GOP and should be left to the left.
mavfunn
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 3:23 p.m.
When Olson announced his attention to switch political parties for the 2012 election at a local Tea Party meeting, at first the listeners thought it was a joke and laughed along with him. Then he explained his reasoning: most voters are ignorant and lazy and will vote straight ticket Dem or Rep, so this means a chance to usurp the vote of any Democratic party straight ticket voters in the district comprised of mostly Democratic voters in a presidential election year where the incumbent is likely to be reelected, according to him. So, in effect, it's an attempt to win an election by tricking people into voting for you. Then, even the Tea Party constituency present at this particular meeting seemed disgusted by this underhanded, dishonest tactic.
mavfunn
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 4:06 p.m.
Of course voters deserve criticism for being uninformed (though that is partly due to external causes designed beyond their conceivable control as well), and it's not like there aren't plenty of voters whose votes are dictated by the (R) following a name about which they know nothing. But it certainly doesn't excuse the dishonest political opportunism of gaming the system by deliberately running for election as a representative of a party whose positions you don't support to take advantage of this voter ignorance. It shows that winning elections is more important than being a forthright elected representative of the people who voted for you. It's interesting how Dem and Rep supporters are fine with people gaming the system and adding another layer of dishonesty to an already corrupted electoral process, as long as they support said candidate. This behavior only entrenches voter apathy and ignorance. It's not like the cure for voter apathy and voter ignorance is more underhanded tactics and then saying they weren't "tricked" after all as if Olson isn't doing anything to exacerbate the situation and is totally blameless.
Angry Moderate
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 3:36 p.m.
"Tricking" people? Why not criticize the idiots who votes based on the (D) after the name without even knowing who the candidate is?
lefty48197
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 2:59 p.m.
Jose Owen Diaz is a big fat liar. He wants to lie to the voters and deceive them. Good luck getting any votes!
Royalprince
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 2:37 p.m.
Rick Olson is nothing but a rightwinger, regardless of what Party he claims he represents. He supports the radical agenda of Governor Snyder and the other rightwingers in Michigan, who are constantly waging war against the poor, middle class, seniors, and disabled. We need to defeat Rick Olson at any costs! I think this goal is more likely to take place, given the Democratic trending of the 55th District.
DonBee
Sun, May 6, 2012 : 2:35 p.m.
Unfortunately many voters don't do research on specific candidates, they vote along a party line. The ballot makes it easy by allowing people to vote a "straight ticket". One real reform would be to remove the "straight ticket" option on the ballots. Then people would at least have to read the names. The arguement for leaving it, is it takes longer to read the names and mark your choice for each office. If you are on a lower tier office in a district, you have a MUCH higher chance of winning if you are in the party that holds the majority of voters.