Eric Papenfuse makes his acceptance speech last night.
So, what was that all about?
And, by “all that,” I mean the last couple of months of debates and divisions and accusations and counter-accusations and raising money and spending money and negative mail and countless interviews and news stories, all so voters overwhelmingly could re-affirm their selection from the May primary.
In the end, was it a good thing that Eric Papenfuse once again faced off against Dan Miller in the general election? Or was repeating the primary a waste of time, energy and money?
As I’ve written before, I found it disheartening that independent candidate Nevin Mindlin, who would have added a new dimension to the race, was tossed from the general election ballot after a petition challenge. But a Papenfuse/Miller rematch? Hadn’t we just been down that road?
I’ve asked a few colleagues and friends this question and have received a variety of responses. Some come down on the “worth it” side; others say no. Still others split the difference.
After Miller made his announcement to re-enter the race, I was definitely on the “not” side. I looked ahead and saw only more acrimony and bitterness in this already-divided city. I thought that a political repeat would serve little purpose other than to set people against one another again. Meanwhile, I saw almost no path to victory for Miller, so was even more confused over why this committed Democrat would decide to run on the Republican side, a ballot spot he had earned with 196 write-in votes.
I’ve since softened my opinion to a degree.
The race, in fact, did spark exactly the negativity I feared. Both sides hurled their share of barbs, with Miller notably more negative than during the primary campaign. This is no surprise, as challengers and candidates who face longer odds often go on the attack.
So, as the campaign wore on, Miller exploited and mischaracterized the issue of Papenfuse’s personal debt, while returning again and again to his campaign donors, in one mailer even turning Papenfuse into a marionette, implying that his wealthy contributors would pull his strings. Papenfuse responded with his own questionable assertions, such as calling Miller a career politician and comparing him to a chameleon.
But, if you listened carefully, the candidates did offer substantive, interesting discussion that may have been lost had Miller stayed out. The Harrisburg Strong recovery plan was debated extensively, though I’m not sure many minds were changed. City management, priorities, debt, public safety, education, economic development and many other issues all were addressed through debates, interviews and campaign speeches. It is my belief that many residents are better informed as a result, though at a rather high cost.
Last August, after Miller announced that he would run on the Republican side, setting up the rematch, I summed up the coming general election contest with this: Harrisburg, are you really, really sure you want Eric Papenfuse, not Dan Miller, as your mayor?
After another tough, bitter contest, the answer certainly appears to be “yes.”
—–
How Harrisburg is like Springfield: In a post-election story today, PennLive reporter Emily Previti quotes Miller as saying this about his defeat, “There are 2,300 people who get it. But the city’s made their decision, and they’ve had their chance.”
This rather ungracious remark reminded me of a well-known scene from a Simpsons’ episode entitled “Trash of the Titans.” In it, Homer beats the incumbent Ray Patterson for sanitation commissioner. In his concession speech, Patterson says only this to the residents of Springfield before marching off the stage: “You’re screwed. Thank you. Bye.”
