Idaho elections: A reaction roundup

What happens next?

A common postmortem theme. What mandate with Republicans take from Tuesday's blowout wins? And whither (or is it wither?) the Idaho Democratic Party?

I wrote a bit about both topics in my Thursday column.

• From Lewiston Tribune editorial writer Marty Trillhaase: "Politicians are not a particularly introspective lot. They don’t typically look for nuance. When it comes to elections, they hear what they want to hear.

"The mandate (Gov. Butch) Otter and the GOP are reading right now goes like this: Don’t raise taxes. Under any circumstances.

"Even if the state budget falls another $300 million short next year.

"Even if it means cutting schools again.

"Even if it mandates slashing colleges and universities.

"Even if it translates into abandoning Idaho’s most vulnerable citizens."

• From Adam Graham, a conservative blogger who writes for the Idaho Press-Tribune: "There is no Democratic bench. There is no Democratic new hope. While it seems possible that Democrats may be able to make a case for a change of parties in the Governor's mansion in 2014, the question is, 'Who will make it?' The answer appears to be, 'No one who can win.'"

• From The Times-News, Twin Falls: " What does it all mean? Look for a very conservative 61st Idaho Legislature — which convenes in 10 weeks — and a governor who just received a ringing mandate to continue his tightfisted ways.

"How loud a mandate? In Jerome County, for example, where 58 percent of registered voters cast ballots in turnout nearly unprecedented for a non-presidential year, two-thirds said yes to Butch."

• From Marc Johnson, who served as former Gov. Cecil Andrus' chief of staff, and is now president of Gallatin Public Affairs: "There was nothing anti-incumbent about this election. It was anti-Democrat. Idaho is painted deep RED today and it is likely to stay that way for a long, long time."

One candidate's secret

• Former GOP congressional candidate Dennis Mansfield — a volunteer for congressional candidate Raul Labrador during the May primary — blogged about the secret of Labrador's success: "Raul Labrador's secret to winning this race appears to be that he simply believes in himself...and because he believes in himself, his bride and family joined him in that belief ... and then an ever-increasing series of 'rings' widened out ... believers who voted for him.

"Voters who believed in him."

A confusing new law

• The Idaho Press-Tribune offered a well-stated editorial today about the state's new voter ID law. Signs at some polling places said — incorrectly — that an ID was required to vote: "It’s quite probable that some voters who don’t have photo ID saw the signs, figured they weren’t allowed to vote and went home. There also have been reports of people who were actually turned away at polling places because they didn’t have identification.

"If even one person did not end up voting because of confusion on their part or the part of an election official, that’s one person too many."

... And, playing the victim's role ...

David Frazier, the photographer and activist who led the fight against three constitutional amendments on long-term public debt, took to his blog to issue a statement infused with the juice of sour grapes:

“I learned it is impossible to battle the might of government, regardless of the nobility of one’s cause. My only regret is that I didn’t get a commission on the advertising purchased by the proponents.”

This from a guy who campaigned on the right of the people to vote — which they did on Tuesday, ratifying the amendments.

Get Twitter updates on my blog and column and Statesman editorials. Become a follower. You can also get updates on Facebook's Idaho Statesman Opinion Page.


KR, your stab at Frazier is a bit ironic.

You have mentioned your disfavor of Vandersloot using his money in advertsiing to push a political agenda (and sometimes in secrecy).

Remember YOUR words, KR, of 10/30:

Frazier is singing the canary's warning song in the proverbial cave.

And yet you take a stab at him

Yes, KR, the people voted, but as YOUR quoted on YOUR Facebook page: "Everybody knows that the world is full of stupid people."

Citizens United v FEC:
The story is there is no longer a dollar limit to campaign and political advertising by third parties.

Of course, The Statesman will benefit greatly from that decision (in more HUGE campaign ads). Unfortunately, the readers will not.

Not exactly.

I didn't criticize VanderSloot for "using his money in advertsiing" (sic). I criticized VanderSloot for using snippets of Idaho Public Television debate footage — and for trying to push a court confrontation over copyright issues.

Kevin Richert
editorial page editor

it's all about dollars

From the article:

"IPTV has been bullied into a bind. ....

...IPTV can fight for its copyright. Personally, I think that’s the only choice. But if that happens, taxpayers or IPTV donors get to pay for the state’s side of the legal wrangling.

Thanks a bunch, Frank.


and also:
"Remember ...the outfit that spent $41,000 on last-minute ads slamming Supreme Court candidate John Bradbury?

How else is "bullied" to be accomplished?

And by the way ...

Since you've gone to the effort of looking me up on Facebook to look at my page, I'm hoping the tone of the quotation isn't lost on you. The quote comes from a song, and I interpret it to be humorous and ironic.

Thanks for your interest.

Kevin Richert
editorial page editor


I like this kind of roundup:

(these columns won't look right in the blog format)
Total votes / Dem Votes / %
Gov 451,598 / 148,300 / 33%
LT Gov 440,894 / 119,630 / 27%
SoS 438,681 / 112,963 / 26%
Cntrllr 432,978 / 125,370 / 29%
Schools 443,507 / 175,131 / 39%


-Let's guess the governor race(highest#) represents the total voters

-Let's guess the Sec of States race represents true partisan voting- how many people would cross the line to vote for the other party in THAT race? It's very calm, "nonpolitical", almost zero campaigning, etc. Someone stands at the both on that choices, and says," I don't know. I am X so I'll vote X."

- So looking at the SoS race, it can be concluded Idaho is about 75%/25% Republican/Democrat.

What democrat has a chance in that condition?

YET, some of the dems did 'pull' some moderate Republicans. That can be seen in the Schools race and Gov race.

Obviously some 'swing voters' are dismayed with Luna and Otter. So like,,, 50,000 out of 450,000?

What were the r/d ratios back in the 70's & 80's of Evans and Andrus' days?

Bottom line

If you have a true interest in Idaho politics, just run with an R behind your name. Terrible balance of governmental power when a state is so one-sided and a serious detriment to the citizens of the Idaho - those that voted and those that chose not to vote. Guess which ones will be the most vocal?

Some excellent recommendations for state government were presented but if you are content with the status quo that is just excactly what you got. Idaho is definitely not a progressive state; just a good ole boy, bending the elbow, ride'em, etc. etc.


What is a progressive state?

Characteristics of a progressive state would be what?

What makes being progressive a good thing?

Please name 5 progressives states?

A progressive state is one well served by "Flo", pimp2...


You must remove your post before it will be posted.

David Frazier

David Frazier had his 15 minutes of fame with what's known as the "Frazier Decision". He tried to ride that to greater glory and got thrown from his horse.