Road to the 43rd District: Let’s Focus On The Real Opponent

By Contributor on Mar 25th, 2010
-district-let%e2%80%99s-focus-on-the-real-opponent /

BY LEONARD MANOUKIAN

For a few weeks now, readers of this publication have read article
after article addressing the upcoming special election to fill the
seat left vacant by Paul Krekorian as the California Assembly
Representative from the 43rd District. They have been reminded of the
importance of having a member of the Armenian community being elected,
have been informed as to who the candidates are, their strengths,
qualities, and prospects for winning. Most important, from the
vantage point of the various writers has been that the readers know
who was considered to be the optimal candidate: Nayiri Nahabedian.
With less than three weeks left in the special election campaign, and
all things being equal, it would seem that from now to April 13th
there should be nothing further to do but to keep repeating that
message in order to reinforce it. But all things are not equal.

Since his campaign began, we have witnessed a steady stream of
`commentary’ from Mr. Chahe Keuroghlian relating to Ms. Nahabedian and
her campaign. This commentary has had little to do with the facts and
issues, has been personal and, unfortunately, has had a negative
personal tone. (I will address Mr. Keuroghlian’s `commentary’
regarding the ANC another time.) In the past few days, some of you
have received, and most of you have heard about, a mailer sent out by
the Nahabedian campaign which brought to light certain details of Mr.
Keuroghlian’s life. It would seem that, though an election campaign
begins with lofty idealism on all sides, it quickly degenerates into a
pitched battle. As the campaign drags on, the days get longer,
tempers become shorter, and judgment is, alas, the first casualty.

We are all disappointed that the candidates, who are by no means
neophytes, have permitted what should be a dialogue to become name
calling. We should not retreat to that trite old saw that `…it’s a
shame that Armenians are their own worst enemies.’ This is politics;
the ultimate meritocracy. Again, let us not pretend that Ms.
Nahabedian’s camp was the initiator of the current aggressions – she
has been the target of personal attacks for weeks. However, her
recent mail piece has escalated matters, distracting us all from the
realities of this campaign.

Mr. Keuroghlian’s camp, no doubt, will attempt to cast the various
comments disparaging

Ms. Nahabedian as valid `political’ commentary. Suffice it to say
that one man’s `commentary’ is another’s insult. And please let us
not have any finger pointing and complaining about who announced their
candidacy earlier, this is a serious campaign for a serious office not
a first-come first-served cafeteria.

So perhaps we need to re-focus on the task at hand, the community,
community organizations and those who ask to be elected as the
community’s `leaders.’ Our candidates should be urged to reject
negative campaigning and focus on increasing Armenian voter turnout.
Our candidates should be urged to ask their supporters, or would be
supporters, to vote for them because they will best represent the
community, address its needs, and help solve its problems.

It is in our community’s interest for these campaigns to inform voters
of their views on the issues and reject negative attacks against each
other; negative campaigns drive down voter turn out, it is that
simple. A candidate cannot win with Armenian votes alone. For their
part, those who do not necessarily have our community’s best interests
at heart know that a non-Armenian candidate cannot win without
Armenian votes. It stands to reason, then, that a well qualified,
well financed, Armenian- American candidate who enjoys a wide base of
support among both Armenian and non-Armenian voters will certainly win
the election in the 43rd Assembly District. Naturally, splitting our
vote between two Armenian candidates decreases the chances of either
one being elected. In this case, a low turn-out by Armenian voters
compounds matters by helping a candidate who has no record of service
to the Armenian community. However, a high turn out by Armenian
voters could help overcome this split and give the Armenian candidate
with the best support in the community at large the edge to win. This
makes negative campaigning both unfortunate and counterproductive.
What is worse, the biggest loser in a negative campaign will be the
community.

Who will be the winner? Those who have followed the campaign in the
recent days have seen a barrage of releases from the Gatto campaign
pitting Ms. Nahabedian against Mr. Keuroghlian. Adding nothing to
the substantive discussion, the Gatto campaign has become the
(un)witting beneficiary of the struggle between the Nahabedian and
Keuroghlian campaigns. If the core reasons for entry into this
election race are forgotten by candidates, the only possible victor is
a person who has no real interest in the community in the first
instance – Mr. Gatto.

The ANC-PAC’s analysis of the candidates’ position on issues, record
of service, campaign resources and support from the non-Armenian
community resulted in an endorsement of Nayiri Nahabedian. That
conclusion stands. She has the better chance of winning and the
ANC-PAC calls on the community to vote for her.