Post-election: We can do better
Published: Friday, Nov. 9, 2012, 8:55 p.m.
Sure, the winners are announced and the unmercifully tedious political ads on TV are gone for now. So is it over?
We can do better. Political action is the lifeblood of the nation.
The turnout of registered voters in Armstrong County this week was 68.3 percent, and that's impressive. But why not do better? That number is just a percentage of the registered; where are the others?
Campaigning has changed nationally; nobody can deny that. But must it change in our hometowns, especially for local seats?
Knocking on doors is OK, but what about getting the candidates out in public forums, together or individually?
Dare we suggest that some candidates in future years actually call press conferences or announce their plans to the news media?
And let's hear from candidates willing to suggest plans to bring attention and eventually jobs here to Armstrong County. Or how they would capitalize on development all around us in Allegheny, Westmoreland and Butler counties.
During election campaigns our business communities remain exceptionally silent. We aren't suggesting they endorse candidates but, instead, express their needs and encourage candidates to respond.
The best way to honor our veterans, whose special day is Sunday, is to become involved in the system.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Detroit’s bankruptcy: An object lesson
- Nelson Mandela: The real legacy
- ‘China City’
- PSERS time bomb: Tick, tick, tick, tick ...
- Sunday pops
- The Box
- More ObamaCare fallout: Medicare disadvantage
- Dear Steelers: Perhaps “postseason” is but a quaint notion after all. Yours, Old Man River.
- The Thursday wrap
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- Corrections reinvention