Controversy, debate and ‘back and forthing’ have been steadily increasing in the Allen County Superior Court Criminal Division Judge race.
The recent increase in this has been brought about by a group called, “The Friends of Good Government.” Â The groups have purchased and placed several Wendy Davis for Judge campaign signs around town. Â What probably pushed the issue over the top, was their purchase of television ads from at least one station – WANE-15. Â In case you’ve been living under a rock, I’ve included two links to articles on the web concerning this issue. Â Please note it’s not all-inclusive. Â If there’s something you think I omitted that should be included, drop me a note and I’ll add it as soon as humanly possible.
When I opened my Facebook page this evening, I was treated to four posts concerning the race right off the top.
Please note: – I do not go into Facebook pages and copy to then repost material of a private matter on this website. Â As a matter of fact, this is the first time I’ve ever cited something from Facebook here, in this manner, hence the blacked out portions of the screen capture.
I find this interesting and think it relevant because it demonstrates that local campaigns are embracing social media and the immediacy of contact between a candidate and their supporters, or even detractors. Â With this and changes in voting times and availability, the face of elections has changed dramatically, and will continue to evolve over the coming years.
Related Images:
Stephen,
I’m not sure if you knew this or not, but I have set up a website to track all the news stories and blog posts for all Allen County candidates. Click on my name and it should take you there. Just scroll down till you find the candidate you are looking for and click on their name for links.
Ah! Mystery solved, Phil. I’d run across it a few weeks ago and wondered who was doing this! Great job!
Next year, there are some of us bloggers talking about teaming up for some serious coverage of the 2011 City-wide elections. If you want, I’ll add you to my list of those to contact when we start getting together. I think it would be an interesting project.
Sounds like agreat idea Stephen. The biggest problem, as I see it, is there is hardly any site a person can turn to for comprehensive coverage. Most people want to slant things to suit their own political preferences. My thinking is that if you want a site that is attractive to all voter’s, then you have to include all views. For my site, I decided to include every local news and blog source I could find. Even those who I personally disagree with or that I can’t understand.
There is the issue of information overload to consider though. I just recently noticed how you have your blog set up to condense comments that have high disapproval ratings. I really like that. It allows your core readers to focus on what they feel is important, yet falls short of outright censorship. I think that idea needs to be implemented on your 2011 project. When you cut people out of the discussion entirely (even the nuts) I think you do more harm than good to advancing the dialogue.
Maybe I’ll catch you at a Council meeting some night to talk more. Do you still attend regularly?
Phil – My Council attendance hasn’t been regular this past year. I’ll definitely be making more efforts to be there this coming year.
Different view points is what we’re after and I think with everyone having their own blog would keep the differences alive, yet provide more in depth coverage/analysis. At this early point in the game, I don’t think I’d be in favor of one joint blog, but rather let everyone keep their work on their separate sites. In this way, I think it would avoid the potential danger of someone getting mad and taking their material and leaving. There are ways to aggregate the feeds to have one place to go to, sort of like what you did, but perhaps automate the process a bit more.
Lots of potential for an idea like this I do believe.