Paul Sanford for Alabama Senate District 7
| April 21, 2009 | ||
| 7:00 am | to | 7:00 pm |
On Tuesday, April 21 many Madison county residents will have the chance to vote in the Republican runoff for State Senate District 7. The two candidates are Sam Givhan and Paul Sanford. I will be voting for Paul Sanford.
I will say I am extremely happy that Sanford and Givhan, who happen to be friends from Bible study, ran clean, issue oriented runoff campaigns. Both men share common viewpoints on a number of issues and I have no hesitation in saying I will support the winner 100% against Laura Hall in the general election.
I feel that Paul’s background as a small businessman will be a trait that is sorely lacking in the Alabama Senate. He came out of the shoot with solid positions on major issues facing Alabama, such as favoring a more common sense budgeting method known as prior year budgeting. What ultimately was most important in cementing my decision was not what Paul told me while he was running for office, it was what he told me before he was running for office. I had the opportunity to talk politics with him almost a year ago – well before he was running for anything – and I liked his fiscally conservative views then even though he wasn’t trying to get my vote.
The Huntsville Times choose to endorse neither man in a piece written by David Prather. Their often spineless and decidedly left of center editorial board always has trouble endorsing any non-incumbent Republican candidate – apparently even when only Republicans are running.
If you live in District 7 be sure to get out and vote in the runoff election tomorrow. Polls open at 7:00 am and close at 7:00 pm.
Let me add my endorsement of Paul Sanford. After hearing both candidates on Dale Jackson’s show this morning, I was struck by the fact that both men claim to be against PAC-to-PAC transfers, but Paul Sanford is willing to put his money where his mouth is. Approximate quote from Sam Givhan: “It takes money to win elections, and I’m not going to turn money down.” Approximate quote from Paul Sanford: “My rule of thumb is that if I couldn’t support the PAC’s issue(s), I’m not going to take their money.”
Granted, my endorsement carries considerably less weight than Brian’s.
It would be hard for your endorsement to carry less weight than mine! :)
I think this run-off has been the example of what we expect and like to see. Each man pressures the other on difficult questions about their stance or what they’ve done in the past. To me, it doesn’t seem to be out of malice but actually running a hard nose campaign. Actions speak louder than words.
I agree that Paul’s background would be a welcome addition to the AL Senate and might even bring about the much ballyhooed diversity people keep talking about. Although, I see diversity as background and not skin color, which makes this a perfect example.
Good luck to both men tomorrow.
Well, Givhan is being bought by the Senate Majority PAC (you know, the current majority – the Democrats) – Brian did a whole post on it. He may have signs all over Madison county, even right up at the state line, but he’s not right for Madison county. He’s a trial lawyer that’s paid to keep felons out of jail with plea bargains and probation deals. He’s also against mandatory minimums which would help define at what levels of drug use a crime – felony or misdemeanor – is being committed. I wonder why that is? Why should we send someone to Montgomery whose livelihood is interpretation of the law in a courtroom? If he’s in Montgomery, he can slant the law in his clinents’ favor and make the playing field uneven. FWIW, which means my two cents is probably about as valuable as an Italian lira.
Mr. Johnson, I’m sure its news to Givhan that he is a trial lawyer. As I understand it he has been a practicing real estate attorney for a good number of years. I have no brief with real estate attorneys.
I’m not entirely comfortable with some of Givhan’s PAC money, but I will take him at his word that he is merely playing by the rules as they exist and that he would work to change them if elected. Always risky taking a politician at his word, but I’ve talked with him enough over the course of this campaign to have a certain degree of trust. That said, I prefer Paul’s position on PAC to PAC transfers as exemplified by his actions, not just words. To be fair, we can never know if Paul hasn’t taken any PAC to PAC money because it wasn’t offered or because he declined it.
I personally stayed at Paul’s house while campaigning, and this guy is an amazing man! Although he has no experience in office, he has common sense!