Simkins PAC Endorses Linda Shaw, Nancy Routh, Rick Elmore

Yes!Weekly reports the Simkins PAC endorsements for the primaries next week.  The PAC has made endorsements in several races in which I have had some interest. 

They have endorsed Linda Shaw, who is opposed by Sam Spagnola.

They have endorsed Nancy Routh, who is opposed by Lisa Clapp.

They have endorsed Judge Rick Elmore, who is opposed by Steven Walker.

I think it is reasonable to presume that there is some type of problem if the Simkins PAC endorses a given candidate, unless proved otherwise.  As I have noted previously, I will be voting for Spagnola, Clapp and Walker, respectively. 

Comments

[buzzman]

Ditto for my vote. However, if I had planned to vote otherwise, the Simpkins PAC endorsement would have changed those votes.
I think many candidates are going to find that the PAC endorsement will hurt them, but probably not enough to offset those who vote as directed by the PAC.

[Joe Guarino]

Buzz, given the split in the PAC and its apparent declining influence, it is hard to know how many black voters are following its marching orders. But I think a PAC endorsement means something, and it would be useful to know in the case of Linda Shaw, Nancy Routh and Rick Elmore precisely what the PAC endorsement means.

Think about what it means for Elmore in terms of his approach to crime.

Think about what it means for Routh in terms of the stance she takes on school discipline and order and busing.

Think about what it means for Shaw in terms of following the Melderec con Simkins lead on bonds and spending.

[bubba]

There is no doubt about the message the PAC endorsement sends to candidates: "You need to support the status quo/business as usual operating mode that allows us to continue to thwart good government in our local politics to the advantage of our interests."

[Joe Guarino]

That is it in a nutshell, Bubba. And it means various bad things with respect to how issues are approached here.

[triadwatch]

yes weekly endorsed Sam Spagnola.

GUILFORD COUNTY COMMISSION 3: Linda Shaw (R, i), Dwayne Crawford (R) and Samuel Spagnola (R) We endorse: Spagnola The decisive factor in our endorsement choice in this race is how the candidates have handled themselves in their respective campaigns. In some ways, incumbent Linda Shaw is a more attractive candidate. Case in point is her support for the Guilford County open space program and that she understands the concept of land banking, which is the fiscally prudent approach — one which the new crop of candidates seems to be saying they want. Samuel Spagnola is a lawyer and blogger of the most conservative streak, who relishes a good fight. That’s well and good when the opponent is a newspaper such as YES! Weekly, but it’s almost never serves citizens well when government deliberations turn into blood sport. Unfortunately, this campaign has fatally undermined our confidence in Shaw. Spagnola forced her to admit that bonds approved by voters will likely result in an eventual tax increase, and then she tried to run from the statement. Good government depends on elected officials standing behind their words so that honest debate can occur. Spagnola, then, is better suited for

[jaycee]

Candidates accept endorsement by the Simkins PAC in order to receive a "block" of votes guaranteed by the PAC in return for future "favors" by the candidate to help the PAC further it's political agenda. Is it news to anyone that the Simkins PAC buys and sells votes??

[Joe Guarino]

Keith, that is a remarkable development that Yes!Weekly would endorse the more conservative candidate. But it is an illustration of the problems we have seen with the incumbent.

Jaycee, one of the things we need to understand about the Simkins PAC is that it tends to favor the interests of criminal defendants and defense attorneys. That is one of the reasons the endorsement of Elmore raises questions.

[jaycee]

Exactly, Joe. Buying and selling judges is not above the Simkims PAC.