McSally and Ward’s silly fight over Trump
From the political notebook:
❚ The competition for the Trump-loyalist vote in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate has gotten silly.
Polls indicate that the president is viewed very favorably by Republican voters, who want nominees who will support him. But surely Republican primary voters aren’t looking for automatons who turn over their vote to President Donald Trump wholesale and exercise no independent judgment whatsoever.
Presumably what GOP partisans don’t want is a Never-Trumper, or someone who goes out of his way to criticize and undermine the president. Arizona has the former in Jeff Flake and the latter in John McCain.
Neither Martha McSally nor Kelli Ward fits in either category. Both accept Trump as president, in a way that neither Flake nor McCain really does. They will try to work with him, not against him.
Ward has the superior claim to being a steadfast Trump supporter. She ran against McCain in 2016 on Trump’s “America First” agenda.
McSally didn’t support Trump in 2016, in either the primary or the general. But Trump clearly doesn’t hold that against her. The president has gone out of his way to signal and state his approval of McSally and the job she has done as a member of Congress.
If Trump does not hold McSally’s lack of support in 2016 against her, why should Republican primary voters?
In reality, there’s not that much difference between McSally and Ward on the extent to which they will support the president if elected to the Senate.
Both will want a constructive working relationship with Trump and his administration. Neither will join his chorus of critics, even when they disagree with him. But both will exercise independent judgment and sometimes be in the opposition camp, albeit respectfully so.
Ward is most likely to part company with Trump on immigration and the budget. McSally is most likely to part company on trade and foreign policy.
The Trump-loyalty question should be a neutral factor in this race. Trump has indicated that he likes all the candidates in the primary, including former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. And he has reason to. The important differences between McSally and Ward involve leadership styles and capabilities, not a willingness to have a constructive and supportive relationship with Trump and his administration.
❚ Phoenix has a charter amendment on the Aug. 28 ballot, Proposition 411, that purports to consolidate City Council elections with the state schedule. But it only partly does that. And does it in an odd way that reduces the value of the change.
Phoenix has perfected the art of what I’ve called by-invitation-only elections: elections held on dates when mostly city groupies will show up. It’s allowed a slender slice of the electorate to determine leadership and enact a parade of tax increases.
Right now, Phoenix holds its elections for mayor and City Council in August and November of odd-number years. Some of us have clamored for years for cities to hold their elections on the state schedule, in August and November of even-numbered years, when the most voters are likely to show up.
Phoenix doesn’t have partisan elections. So, the first election isn’t a party primary to select the candidates who will run in the general election. If someone wins more than 50 percent of the vote in the first election, that’s the end of it. If no one does, then the top two vote-getters run off against each other.
Prop. 411 would move the first election to the state’s general-election date in November of even-numbered years. That’s when the most voters show up.
If no candidate got a majority, however, the runoff would be in March of the following, odd-numbered year.
According to the city, roughly 70 percent of city candidate elections are decided in the first election. However, the 30 percent that go to a runoff are likely to be the most important races.
For example, the November election to replace Mayor Greg Stanton, who resigned to run for Congress, features three substantial candidates and is likely to go to a runoff. So, while less-contested elections will see a large increase in voter participation, the most important ones will still be by-invitation-only.
Prop. 411 is arguably a step in the right direction. But it’s far from optimal.