The Vague Candidate

Bryan Fischer is puzzled by what he’s learned of Matt Salisbury, Bill Sali’s Republican primary opponent for Congress:

The question that remains is a more pragmatic one: if the congressional seat is already held by a devout, pro-life, pro-family supporter of the war effort, why is Mr. Salisbury even running against him?

The question is answered in the Boise Weekly article. It’s all about Bill Sali’s perceived style:

The father of three said he’s the right candidate to offer voters an alternative. “[Voters] deserve a better choice than the incumbent,” he said. “[The last election] left so many Republicans in that district unsatisfied and unhappy.”

Salisbury calls himself a lifelong Republican, who holds the core Republican values, and said he probably agrees closely with Sali on many issues, but said Sali has been too controversial. “The last thing we need is a polarizing figure,” he said.

“There are issues important to me after coming back from Iraq that are not typical Republican issues,” the Iraq war veteran said. “The party is changing.”

Salisbury said it is important for the United States to see things through to the end, although he thinks there are better approaches to establishing a lasting democracy in Iraq.

Either the reporter from the Boise Weekly is not a good writer in reporting specifics or Salisbury is being incredibly vague. What are these issues that are important to you after coming back from Iraq? How is the party changing? What is the better approach? Also, he “probably agrees closely with Sali on many issues”? Has he not reviewed where Congressman Sali stands on the issues? Would he mind sharing what those issues are? Maybe, before announcing, Mr. Salisbury could have better developed his message.

Instead, if elected, he promises to unite voters and focus on the job rather than on the next election. “The public trust is served by a unifier rather than someone who polarizes voters,” Salisbury said. “The founding fathers did not intend for politicking and running for public office to begin the day after you take office.”

Indeed, the founding fathers did not, but how is he going to effect this change. Members of Congress don’t get to decide this. The cycle does.

He said he will be willing to work with Democrats, and his campaign will champion the causes of a balanced budget, the environment and energy policy, although he declined to get into specifics.

No specifics. What a surprise. Reading this article, I’m left to conclude that Mr. Salisbury isn’t so much running against Bill Sali but against the public perception of Bill Sali. Perhaps, this is his “a man’s got to do what a man’s got to do” campaign. Regardless, this introduction is fairly rough. As Bryan Fischer says of his initial introduction as a candidate:

Mr. Salisbury thus unwittingly chose wording that communicated a meaning opposite of the one he intended. He acknowledged that his positions on the issues would likely be identical to Rep. Sali’s 90% of the time. 

His unfortunately inapt phrasing in his first foray into political life perhaps reveals that Mr. Salisbury, though obviously well-intentioned, may be a bit too inexperienced to make his first run for public office a run for a seat in Congress.

Indeed, I will say that I was far more prepared and studied when I ran for State Legislature and I’d lived in the state only six months before announcing.  Mr. Salisbury would do well to see how Mr. Sali has been doing in Congress. Other than the anti-gravity bill joke, he’s had little trouble and those in Washington seem to agree that he’s doing well and working hard within the caucus.

He’s certainly willing to stick to his guns and stand up to big spending, but that doesn’t make him incivil, impolite or unfit.  The challenge probably should be little worry to Sali, if the rest of the Salisbury campaign is as rough as the announcement. Idaho Republicans are very conservative (in the sense of cautious) and the odds of them throwing out the 2006 Republican Freshman class president and sending a 34 year old guy who doesn’t seem to have a grasp on the issues up against the Democratic nominee (who will have deep pockets.) As I’ve pointed out before, since Helen Chenoweth took the seat in 1994, there’s been a contested primary every year but 2002. Salisbury might break 30% of the vote provided no one else gets into the race to split the anti-Sali vote, if not he could be in the teens. The only chance would have would be massive Democratic crossovers. However, as the Dems have a pretty substantial 3-way primary for this same seat, few will sacrifice their vote on that contest to toss Bill Sali.

So, in short, Matt Salisbury is a nice man, just don’t expect him to be a Congressman.

Update

Chris at Unequivocal Notion makes it a bi-partisan “Huh?” moment:

 

I guess I’m just kind of with everyone else in wanting to know what the hell was even the point of announcing a bid for Congress when you aren’t even remotely prepared for the onslaught that you had to know was coming.

 

He then goes on to compare conservatives to the mafia, but the point remains, Bryan Fischer and I aren’t the only ones who don’t get this campaign.