Line of the Day, Angle Edition

“I’ll answer those questions when I’m the Senator”-Sharron Angle, Republican candidate (and frontrunner) for the Senate in Nevada.

The questions?

We’ve tried to go to her public events and ask, but she won’t answer. We’ve tried to call and email her campaign, but they won’t answer. Now, we’re finding her at the airport, still trying to get answers.

"I think when it comes to major policy issues, the people of Nevada are most concerned about our jobs, our homes and our economy," she said.

"If you want to be one of 100 U.S. Senators that are deciding on war powers and on ratifying treaties, which is what a Senator has to do, you have to answer these questions," said Reporter Nathan Baca.

I find it utterly amazing and wholly unacceptable for a candidate for public office, let alone the Senate, to take such a position.  And, as Doug Mataconis notes, she doesn’t even want reporters from some stations at her election night event because they dared ask her questions.

And no, this is not an endorsement of Harry Reid, so playing that card in the comments simply elides the issue at hand.

Please follow and like us:
FILED UNDER: Campaign 2010, Quick Takes, US Politics
Steven L. Taylor
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a Professor of Political Science and a College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog). Follow Steven on Twitter

Comments

  1. Steven,

    This is the reason that it’s good that Nevada has that “none of these” line on the ballot.

    If I lived there, that’s who I’d vote for.

  2. alcoholic anomalous says:

    “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

  3. Brummagem Joe says:

    And that you see Doug is effectively voting for the nut. When you stand aside and ignore obvious unsuitability or malevolence you’re allowing evil to triumph. That’s where your nihilism shows itself I fear. History is littered with examples of where “passing on the other side” can lead.

  4. Steve Plunk says:

    It’s likely Angle’s relationship with the press is strained and she sees no purpose in answering what could be gotcha questions this late in the game. She’s made case for election and is now waiting.

    Dr. Taylor, I understand you don’t like her but please don’t let that cloud your judgment. She has a right to answer what she wants and she can choose who attends her election night get together. How often does a current office holder walk past the press without answering questions? Election night parties are not exactly open to all either. Neither of those is amazing or wholly unacceptable.

    In a two person race if you demean one candidate that’s not an implied endorsement of the other? Outside of academia that doesn’t fly.

  5. She has a right to answer what she wants and she can choose who attends her election night get together.

    Yes, she has the right. That doesn’t make it the right thing to do, however.

    Election night parties are not exactly open to all either.

    True, but it is a petty and vindicative move. I expect politicians to make themselves open to the press. It is rather central to functional democracy.

    In a two person race if you demean one candidate that’s not an implied endorsement of the other? Outside of academia that doesn’t fly.

    How do you figure?

  6. Indeed, to follow that last point: part of the problem with our politics at the moment is the assumption that one has to go with one’s side no matter what/to be against X to be for Y and vice versa.