If I wasn't voting for myself, I would vote for...


I would vote for Shrina because she brings the mind of an engineer.  Engineers see and evaluate problems based on logic, reasoning, and established principles.  She came from humble beginnings and knows the value of hard work.  Her family is an example of the contributions immigrants make to our society and culture.  Shrina would be a valuable asset for the people o the 41st.  


As much as I think Will is a good choice, there are 3 reasons that really stand out to me for not voting for him.  First, in his campaign literature it states he wants to turn the 41st blue.  I don't think it should be red or blue, but purple, a representation of everyone and not just a party.  Second, he calls the incumbent a political extremist.  I have nothing personal against Calvert but I do have some fundamental and  philosophical differences.  I feel if you have to call your opponent names, then maybe you're hiding behind slogans but showing us a little of your real self.  And my third and biggest issue was watching Will on an online debate.  He addressed that he didn't go into the military because of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy at the time.  This bothers me because as a veteran in the 80's I served with and had friends who were gay.  While I don't believe you have to serve in the military to serve your country, saying "you would have, but..." shows a lack of courage that others were willing to make.  I do thank will for his service as a federal prosecutor where this country could use more like him.


I honestly do not know much more about Anna than what is on her webpage.  I think her reason for running is a lot lie mine.  I give her credit for entering "The Arena" and standing up for what she believes in.  I wish her the best of luck.


He has served for 30 years and I thank him for his service.  Public office should not be a career.  I have fundamental and philosophical differences with Ken, that does not mean we can't work together for the good of the district.  My biggest issues, and the one that got me interested in running, was a lack of outrage over the January 6th insurrection.  Then to follow up with trying to overturn a valid election.  I believe he continues to support the "Big Lie" which to me is damaging the credibility of our democratic principles.  If he would have rejected Donald Trump's endorsement, I might have voted for him.  But accepting that endorsement tells me all I need to know on where he stands and I don't like it.


Is the dirty politics we are going to have to endure.  The fact is that Calvert will win one of the two spots.  The other challengers I am up against, if they win that second spot, will immediately be labeled as socialist, left-wing, wealth distribution liberals, etc.  They are not, they are just concerned Americans, like me, who are tired of the bullshit and want to try and change things for the better.  However, even though this is a new district, it still leans middle-right.  Calvert has the advantage especially if the election is based primarily on red/blue leanings.  I believe I am the better option in a zero-sum game against Calvert.  


An established theory where the optimal outcome is that parties get something (win-win) versus a win-lose scenario.  To defeat Calvert  need to strive for an optimal outcome.  That will be a candidate that can pull together Republicans and Democrats who are willing to compromise.  Those who are not just one-issue voters.  Richard Nixon called this the "silent majority".  That is who I am looking for.