SCPR "ELECTION 2009 SERIES" (VOL 7): WHY AREN'T STARK COUNTY'S CANDIDATES LETTING VOTERS KNOW THEIR VIEWS?

UPDATE:  10/05/2009 07:20 AM

SCPR apologies to North Canton council candidate Dennis Coy, Marlboro Township trustee candidate Tom Cognata and Canton council candidate Christopher Hoelzle for including them in my admonition for not answering The Repository questionnaire on their candidacy for their inclusion in The Rep's Election Central 2009.

Each of these candidates have e-mailed the SCPR and protested that they have answered The Rep's questionnaire.

So The Report apololgizes to these folks as well as any others who have responded to The Reps questionnaire and yet to have it published.

TO THE REPOSITORY MANAGING EDITOR, EXECUTIVE EDITOR AND EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR:  What is going on with you folks?  

 TO SCPR BLOG READERS:

So much for trusting The Repository to be on top of things.  Yours truly should have known better.


ORIGINAL POST BELOW

The Canton Repository has gone to great lengths to help Stark County voters be informed for the numerous mayoralty, city council, township trustee and board of education of races coming up in about 30 days.

In fact, early voting has already begun.

The SCPR is making every effort to make sure voters are informed on the contested races in Stark County.

But there is a rub.

What rub?

Candidates are not responding to candidate questionnaires.

Notice on the graphic above that only 10 (as indicated by the red letter listings in the graphic) of  54 voting entities' candidates have any response at all to The Rep's Election Central 2009. (Note:  Only 52 are shown on the graphic which indicates that The Rep staff inadvertently missed Canal Fulton and the Stark County Educational Service Center).

The SCPR has had a similar response to its blog of about a week ago directing candidates to a source to obtain a "fill-in the blank questionnaire" in .pdf format (which is accessible through Adobe's free reader).

One can understand this phenomenon if the candidate is an incumbent.

Incumbents have a clear advantage with name recognition over most challengers and therefore the reason goes:  "why muddy the water with my viewpoints, when I am likely to win on 'name recognition' alone?"

How self-serving!  These folks want to do "public service?"

But for challengers, the silence makes absolutely no sense at all.

Why even go get a petition and circulate it if one is going to pass up opportunities for "free" exposure to the voting public?

Makes you want to question the desirability of having this folks in office in the first place, doesn't it?

Readers of the SCPR and The Rep should be admonishing candidates (when they call you or come to your door) for not publishing their views on specific questions posed to them by yours truly and The Rep staff.

A FINAL WORD

Shame on you candidates who haven't made your views known to the voting public in these public forums!!!