I’ve been so critical of the top two, but what was I thinking? In the SD 7 race, the top two is demonstrating what it can do. Isn’t it grand?
First, look at all that money. More than $6.2 million at last count, much of it from independent committees. We simply wouldn’t have that kind of investment in political participation without top two giving us this second round election. That’s one of top two’s greatest attributes – it produces more money. And austerity-crazy California needs more spending, no?
Such spending is good for political consultants, who are basically the only people who follow state politics anymore. So we need to help them out. Indeed, in the top two era, it’s perfectly fitting that one of the two candidates in the SD 7 race, Steve Glazer, is a political consultant.
Another great thing about the top 2 in SD7. This race is not boring. It’s not about issues or policy or visions of the future – the stuff people care about. It’s about personality and personal attacks. After all, both candidates are Democrats, and the differences between them on policy aren’t profound. So they can get “nasty, ugyly” as John Myers described the race last week. Which is entertaining for those of us who follow politics. Which is to say the political consultants.
Don’t forget the mailers – so many that Glazer said publicly that voters should throw them away. Fine, but it’s good to see the post office getting all that business of delivering them. Expand top two nationally, and the postal service might be saved!
Yes, it’s not perfect. Glazer has been kind of sour about the top two’s greatness in his race, saying that “campaign spending and special interest involvement in this race is over the top.” He responds with plans that would prevent various political people from eating and drinking at certain times of year. At least that’s as close as I can figure his plan. What a killjoy.
If he were serious about campaign money, he’d reverse him and come out against top two.
But who wants that?