Ken Vance



I have a friend who has spent the majority of his professional career as an executive in the National Basketball Association. Several years ago, he and I were talking about some college players who were about to be selected in the NBA Draft.


My friend spoke in disbelief that the players didn’t have enough of a drive to win. There’s a belief that young basketball players play too many games these days in their youth, prep and collegiate careers so they are predisposed to not care as much about winning each and every game by the time they get to the NBA level.


My friend looked at me in disbelief at this idea before he said, “as far as I’m concerned, if they’re keeping score, I don’t care what it is, I want to win.’’ I couldn’t have agreed with him more.


I want to ask the members of the Clark County Republican Party something. How important is winning to you when it comes to the race for the county chair position? Because, you may disagree with this, but I think the outcome of the chair race in the Nov. 3 General Election will be decided by the county Republicans, even though there isn’t a member of that party on the ballot.


Here’s how it breaks down. Democrat Mike Dalesandro and Marc Boldt, who states no political preference, advanced from a field of five in the Aug. 4 Primary Election, defeating three Republicans. If left alone, the two would battle it out in November and I think most people in the county believe Boldt would win by a pretty decisive margin.


The thinking, which I subscribe to, is that Dalesandro would primarily receive votes from only Democrats. Whereas, Boldt, a former Republican, would receive most of the Republican votes and also steal away a significant amount of Democrats from the far less experienced Dalesandro. I believe it would be a double-digit (percentage) win for Boldt.


But, it doesn’t look like that’s the way things are going to go. Two weeks ago, the Republican Precinct Committee officers voted to endorse the Write-In Liz Pike For County Chair campaign rather than endorse one of the two candidates on the ballot. Things were contentious at the meeting. A significant number of Republicans wanted to endorse Boldt and were unhappy when the write-in effort was approved.


I have no problem with the Republicans being split between Boldt and the Pike write-in campaign. Every voice should be heard and every vote should be counted and there are a lot of principles at play. But, after that has taken place, don’t you then want to unite around one goal, knowing that if you don’t, everyone in the party is going to be unhappy on the evening of Nov. 3?


The logical thinking is this. Dalesandro is going to likely receive at least 40 percent of the vote. Sure, some Democrats will vote for Boldt, but the majority will stick with the lone “D’’ on the ballot. Those who will write-in Pike’s name, would never have voted for Dalesandro, so he loses nothing by the write-in campaign.


Boldt, on the other hand, will be hurt more and more as the Pike write-in campaign catches momentum. Trust me, it will gain momentum as we get closer to Nov. 3. But, will it be enough to overtake Dalesandro and the 40 percent he would appear to have in the bag? Or, will there only be a level of support to take away enough votes from Boldt that Dalesandro is handed the victory?


Consider that if I, and other prognosticators are right, and Dalesandro does get 40 percent, either Boldt or the Pike write-in campaign would need at least two thirds of the remaining votes to win. If the Democrats really stick together and Dalesandro gets 45 percent of the vote, then either Boldt or the Pike write-in campaign would need 82 percent of the remaining votes.


So, back to my question to Clark County Republicans. Do you want to stand stubbornly on what you think was the best direction for the party to go in this race? Or, do you want to compromise and join together and win? You already blew the Primary by splitting the vote between three candidates. Are you going to throw away the General as well?


Like my NBA friend said. If they’re keeping score, I would always chose to win.




(5) comments

David Knight

In sports it really does not matter in the end who wins. In politics there are consequences for a vote for the winner. You are really responsible for the result.
If we really want smaller and less expensive/intrusive government, it is up to us to vote that way.

If one of the parties is more conservative, it is their responsibility to show the way for people to vote for that. Sometimes it is a little harder to do. Like when BOTH candidates on the ballot are very expensive.

Frank Decker

"A significant number of Republicans wanted to endorse Boldt and were unhappy when the write-in effort was approved."

That's the kind of 'spin', Ken, that we've come to expect every day out of the Columbian. It's disappointing to see you go down that path. Were you at the meeting? Did you hear the vote counts?

25-49 in favor of the Boldt endorsement.
47-12 in favor of the Write-In Liz Pike endorsement

The "significant" thing that came out of that meeting was a resounding disapproval of Marc Boldt being elected as County Chair.

For alternative perspective:


Well, I have to disagree with your percentages, Ken.

I see Boldt as a quasi-democrat. His positions are democrat, he's supported by democrats (Even endorsed by the furthest -to-the-left-organization involved with democrats here locally, the Young Democrats) and I believe the problem with your conclusion is that Boldt and Dalesandro will split the leftist vote. Boldt even has leftist campaign management.

Combined, both Boldt and Dalesandro picked up about 53% or so of the vote in the primary. There's little reason to think that figure will grow appreciably based on the fact that both Boldt and Dalesandro are only a few votes apart.

I believe That Pike can win with less than 40% of the vote because even the democrats are split over who to support, and if your look at Boldt's PDC's, you can see an awful lot of CRC and democrat checkbooks have been pulled out for Marc: Mr. CRC himself, Tim "No Tolls" Leavitt, Betty Sue Morris, the Charter campaign organization, Bob Schaefer, Judie Stanton, Jack Burkman, Joe Tanner and the like. Clearly, Daelsandro has a major split vote issue to look at and much of this appears to be the reverse of the situation the GOP faced in the primary: 3 Republicans to split their vote... and two democrats, for all intents and purposes, to split the democrat vote.

Even as Marc Boldt's brother-in-law, I will be writing in Liz Pike since she is the only viable alternative.

Dave Norris

Ken Vance, I like that you use sports analogies to make your points. I probably would have said something foolish like "the U.S. allied with the Soviets during WWII to beat the Germans." This would have confused the issue by bringing too much baggage into the conversation.

You are right to keep it simple. Nice editorial. Again.

Lew Waters

One problem of many in this mess, given Liz said she will not file nor will she campaign, whose positions are voters hearing on the Write-in Liz Pike page, hers or Christian Berrigan's?

If hers, are they not violating PDC rules of no contact between candidates and PACs?

So if not hers, who are people voting for?

I would feel much better if Liz just came out and declared she is a candidate and campaigned.

Personally, I do not trust Berrigan even a little.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.