Vote partisan Republican in this “non-partisan” election

  • Political registration, donor history and associations are relevant and telling when scant information is available
  • Democrat registration is a disqualifying attribute
  • Voting time and locations available at Scott County Auditor website
  • Note that only Davenport has a primary Tuesday October 8th.  It is an all city primary for Mayor and individually Ward 3, Ward 4 and Ward 5. Other Wards do not have primaries. 
  • In coming days we will publish the party identification of all the candidates  for the general election as determined already (many races have no primary opposition) and as determined in tomorrow’s primary.
  • Davenport, Bettendorf and North Scott school board races have many candidates but there are no primary eliminations. We will have party registration and other information on those candidates in coming days.
  • Scroll down for party identifications of candidates on October 8th ballot

Why vote partisan in a so-called non-partisan election

On Tuesday there are municipal primary elections in Scott County. These elections are officially non-partisan in that political parties do not hold primaries to nominate candidates to officially run under the party banner. The concept is based on the foolish idea that policy decisions involving education, taxation, the propriety of bond referendums, crime, property values, are somehow divorced from economic and policy preferences exposed or held by participants in organizations focused on such very things. It is silly to think party affiliation is no indicator of approach to issues of the day.

The gullible proponents of “non-partisan” elections were fond of saying “filling a pot-hole or what is best for the children is not a partisan issue”. It is of course a vacuous idea divorced from the scope of activities and how elected officials are informed in their decision making.

The same people who seek non-partisan office often aspire to “partisan” office running under a banner that presumably reflects their approach to policy matters. It is witless to think that their decision making in their non-party role is not informed by the same thought processes that leads them to their “partisan” membership and advocacy.

Of course we know that the real push behind such ‘non-partisan” election tripe was the newspaper editorialists who wanted to enhance their influence over what was acceptable policy, and the Chamber of Commerce trough feeders who wanted to bypass political decision making in favor of true backroom “uni-party” deals.

The “non-partisan” illusion, which was initially officially opposed by Republicans and Democrats is now protected by the Democrat apparat who have discovered that their usual mechanics of election fit quite well into such a system, however indirect or sub rosa. Witness the enthusiasm of union involvement in this “non-partisan” election. Liberals (Democrats) get involved to move a partisan agenda under cover of “non-partisan’. And Republicans don’t know what hit them or do not do much about the pretense.

It is our view that given the most superficial of blandishments in campaign literature, a news media that isn’t much better in revealing candidate positions, a dearth of responded to and/or widely published issue surveys of candidates, — that party affiliation with all its inconsistencies is the best way to determine support this election unless something disqualifying is known about the candidate.

As regards those candidates in these elections who have no recorded political party preference they should be pegged as shallow as they have no evident desire to influence the selections of the parties in the partisan election process, probably only to complain, while limiting their own choices if they even vote in the general elections. Or, they incur a special obligation to reveal what they do believe — their personal platform on all subjects that could reveal their orientation on policy matters before them. We concede that as compared to a Democrat with a Republican not running, some or most might be considered the lesser of evils.

To be sure, using party registration, our readers may be disappointed by the indicated Republican and on occasion be surprised by the Democrat, however, as regards a policy making entity as a whole, dominant party affiliation is the best predictor about spending levels, fiscal policy, growth of government, priorities, mission creep, public union influence, philosophy of governing, competence, “sanctuary” policy, crime control issues, regulations, use of the prestige of office, so called social issues when they come up . . . all things that they may bring under their purview. Some Republicans can correctly be accused of supporting bad policies, but  Democrats are in a more aggressive category of their own with no institutional hold back, indeed just the opposite. And just being a member of such a party facilitates its policies

Look at what Democrats have produced in San Francisco, in LA, in Chicago, in Baltimore and regrettably city after city. Candidates everywhere who identify with that party are possessed of a similar operating philosophy that is easily susceptible to the same sequelae. Union obsequience, tax and spend governance, inculcation of leftist values, incompetence in other matters

As regards school board elections  TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 5th many of the aforementioned pertain and as former Education Secretary William Bennett has remarked “there is a cultural war raging in American society . . . and the winners get to teach our children” Do you want Democrat Party philosophies inculcated into area children, however incremental? The aforementioned cities have school systems run by Democrats and the rot and declining educational achievements did not happen overnight.

We are not saying party affiliation information is always enough, only that it is the best conservatives have to go on at this time for this election. We hope for a time when Republicans compete for the local party endorsement and run as such. By comparison to other local government electoral processes,  no one can maintain that county government which officially involves partisan elections produces worse than “non-partisan” municipal and school board performance.

We call on readers to remember when they vote what Democrats in general are about and to question the good judgement of anyone who declares themselves a Democrat and whether they could possibly be close to you in philosophy and still ascribe to the Democrat party, given its platform, its leadership, and what they are up to. Whatever their personal background, their veteran status their religion, an election is about the infusion of policy that governs YOU. Be friends as you will, but don’t choose them to govern you while being part of the political machinery that has and is bent on doing so much damage.

While it is enough in our judgement, we have more than party registration to disqualify candidates in this election.  We looked up and have set forth some of the donation records of the two we guess are the leading Democrats in the race for Mayor of Davenport – Michael Matson and Daniel Portes. It is inescapable that along with their party affiliation, the pattern of who they give to aids and abets Democrat policies and candidates across the board. And there is other information as well.

The Davenport Mayoral race can be overemphasized, we would much rather have solid Republicans on the council.  However Democrats are looking to have that again and are therefore looking to consolidate. Davenport has a weak mayoral system but the Democrats involved typically see it as a strong bully-pulpit and a launching pad and to use every opportunity it presents for appointments and other avenues to move an agenda (as do the Chamber of Commerce trough feeders).

Remember in the case of former Democrat Mayor Bill Gluba we had someone who aggravated illegal immigration, undermined Second Amendment rights through his mayoral memberships, bowed to communist dictators on US soil and of course used his political influence and prestige of office to push the candidacies of hard leftists with appearances and endorsements “in his personal capacity of course”.

Any demurral by any of today’s Democrat candidates that they would not do as such is BS, in our humble opinion, given who they are.  Democrat Mike Matson, as leader of the Davenport American Legion Post put the kibosh on a request through channels to RENT the facility for a local rally in support of President Trump in the Spring of 2017 as being too political for the venue. Never mind that political candidates of both parties have rented the facility. This prince then used the same organization facilities to further his candidacy for the Democrat nomination for Iowa Governor (alderman to governor shows the megalomania of the guy). It was not merely partisan it was dishonorable treatment of Republican veterans and Legion members. It also says a lot about what Matson thinks about Trump voters in this area. He is as partisan as they come.

Matson soon abandoned his gubernatorial pipe-dream and then contributed at least $200 to eventual nominee Fred Hubbell, as far left a candidate as the Democrats have ever nominated. Matson also gives to Act Blue which only supports “progressive” causes. Matson’s wife is a donor as well. By all indications Matson is hard-core anti-Trump besides being a contributor to the Democrat leftist culture and candidates.

With Matson’s fellow Democrat Dan Portes you have a Braley for Congress donor ($500) Hubbell for Governor donor, Hatch for Governor donor, Rita Hart (State Senate) donor, and also an Act Blue donor. His wife is a  Democrat as well having been an Obama donor, a Hillary donor, Act Blue donor, and various other Democrat office seekers. Portes is also creature of the “uni-party” Chamber of Commerce trough feeders.

All party listings are the candidate’s registration as indicated in the September 2019 Scott County Auditor data base for all voters. Donor information comes via Iowa Campaign Finance reports and Federal Election Commission reports

Davenport Municipal Primary (I = Incumbent)

For the Davenport mayoral primary there are six candidates running. You may vote for only one. The top two vote-getters advance to the general election in November. Note that only two of the six are registered Republicans. To those who say that these municipal elections are just about fixing the streets then Republican Dean Weber is the choice as he has been there and done that as a long-time city employee.

ELIZABETH VANCAMP – DEMOCRAT (her personal platform is heavy on the “green” agenda)


3RD WARD (vote for no more than 1, top 2 advance to general election, can write in)

4TH WARD (vote for no more than one, top two advance to general election)

5TH WARD (vote for no more than 1, top 2 advance to general election)


November General Election and School Board information along with other commentary in coming days

R Mall

This entry was posted in UNCATEGORIZED. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *