The World's Worst PR Guy

     [UPDATE 9/21/20: Just when I thought we were done with this whole ridiculous saga forever, tonight my family's been treated to no less than 20 harassing phone calls from this joker or one of his Cleveland-area associates demanding some post of mine, likely this one from three years ago, be taken down. As it turns out, however, harassing people I care about is not only not likely to get me to take the post down, but is also likely to get this post bumped up to the top of the blog. Don't ya kinda wish you would have just let this one lie?]

     [UPDATE: 9/22/20, 1:15: Over 100 calls and counting, as recently as two minutes ago. Apparently he's following the updates on here as well.]

     Once again, I really hoped I was done with the scandal involving our favorite ex-representative.

     But unfortunately, a consultant for his mistress's campaign decided to bring it back into the public eye, and drag us back into it.

     So, here we go again.

     The state police report came out a few weeks back regarding the investigation into the alleged "blackmail" over Todd Courser and Cindy Gamrat's affair. And the results came out that Gamrat's husband was the one that sent the texts to Courser, who naturally went on to accuse the "bastards"... er, his ex-employees, of being in on the plot, which has yet to be proven. Of course, this is the same guy who told the police that Detroit News reporter Chad Livengood was the blackmailer, so take that as you will. Naturally, he wasn't happy when I called him out on that.

     After that, Lapeer prosecutor Tim Turkelson decided that Joe Gamrat's attempt to end his wife's affair did not rise to the level of criminal blackmail, so no charges were ever filed. One would think that would be the end, but if you think that, you haven't been paying much attention.

     Enter John E. Pavlish, owner of a "reputation management firm" out of the Cleveland area (what, was there nobody in Michigan who would take up this case?), who decided he was going to clear the "good" names of Courser and Gamrat. A few weeks ago, friend requests started going out to members of the various anti-Courser and Gamrat groups on Facebook from the aforementioned Pavlish, I didn't think much of it at the time, until sponsored posts from his consulting business started coming across my news feed, including one where he attacked Detroit News editor Nolan Finley as a "dirtbag' for having written an article blasting Courser and Gamrat. And any dissenting opinion on Pavlish's page was met thusly:

     You read that right; John Pavlish will send drones to spy on you and your family if you post anything he doesn't like on his company's page or say anything he doesn't like anywhere about his clients. This is where I come in.

     Apparently the "half-naked picture" John refers to was a picture the Toddmeister posted on his public state rep page of his son, gun in hand, about how he's training up his kids for... something. Probably to fight the "liberal on slot," whatever the hell that is. I'm not exactly sure who "everyone else" is that he wanted to get online to see him being the bully he claims to fight against, but once again we see Pavlish's main tactic, that being to threaten to expose "everything you've done since you were potty trained." Because clearly I have so much to hide on my public Facebook page and public blog, via which I've engaged publicly with Pavlish's clients. (Until they delete and block me, anyway.) As you're about to see, though, clearly he didn't do his job half as well as he said he would, as he gets several basic details about my life hilariously wrong.

     "National media show," eh? So far, the only people to give this loser any air time have been "Trucker Randy" Bishop and Brian Sommerfield of WYPV in Onaway, a far-right talk station in northern Michigan with so few listeners that one needs an electron microscope to find their ratings.

     So, apparently Pavlish has decided he no longer wants to have this conversation on record, which is most unfortunate for him, as I have no intention of calling his office so he can make his threats against me via phone. And as it turns out, I'm also an unemployed drug addict that's too spineless to not have his words be on public record. Which seems the exact opposite of spineless to me, but what do I know?

     And as it turns out, I was right; he deleted my last comment so that he would, in fact, have the last word. Later, he'd delete all of my comments, prompting someone else to suggest that I deleted my comments to make him look foolish, when in reality, he would have looked every bit as much so by leaving them intact.

     Because why would a public business, particularly one in the business of public relations and reputation management, care about it's reputation or the public's opinion of it? And if calling people "spineless cowards" and "dumb shits" was part of a "well thought out plan," then I'm forced to question how well thought out the plan was in the first place. Now, mind you, this report of his was supposed to finally drop last Monday, and so far, as of nearly a week later... crickets.

     

     The rest of his comments were telling posters that he'd never want to take them on as clients, which doesn't sound like so much a threat as a promise that most would be glad to have him uphold. From there, it would appear Pavlish almost realized the error of his ways and started removing posts, but at this point, the good stuff is already archived, including the time where he threatened to out another critic's MLive username, among other things, despite the fact that she'd never posted on that website. And, of course, the time he promised to go easy on a well known Michigan progressive blogger if he left one of the anti-Courser Facebook groups, while being completely unaware of the site said blogger ran.

     So, if you're still out there, John, I'm curious as to what dirt you think you've got on me or any other Gamrat critic that might be worthy of making it into this alleged report of yours. You have all my pertinent contact information, and if this radio show of yours does indeed exist (which I highly doubt), I'm more than happy to be a guest in studio at any time. Just remember that the internet does indeed go both ways, and the harassment done on your behalf is doing your client no favors.

     But it would appear that's a lesson you learned far too late.

Life During "Quarantine," And Other Thoughts

     It's been a long year these last three weeks, hasn't it?

     Are we sure we're still in 2020?

     I've mostly avoided writing about the current pandemic at hand, in as much as you can really avoid discussing the thing that has pretty much ground most of civilization to a screeching halt, other than to correct blatant misinformation when it comes up. As I've said multiple times, I'm not a doctor, nor do I play one on the radio; don't look to me or any other talking head, be it on TV or Facebook, to tell you how to live your life. I prefer to leave the medical guidance to the actual medical professionals, and quite frankly the world doesn't need another social media warrior to lecture the rest of us on how we're supposed to live. But there's a few things that have been on my mind the last few weeks, none of which I have the time or energy to devote an entire column to. So instead, you get bullet points:

• Is anybody honestly surprised the "stay at home" order was extended? Given that we're just now getting to a point where new cases are seemingly starting to level off, one would think the most sensible course of action would be to give it a week or two and get a better grasp on whether this actually is a trend and whether there ends up being a corresponding drop in the number of deaths as well. And even if that is the case, if the treatment, such as it is, is indeed working, do you stop it at the first slight drop in the numbers? Or wait until things are closer to stable? Common sense would suggest the latter.
  
  And if it is working, could we get a little bit of good news here? Again, common sense would suggest if you expect people to continue doing what they're doing, some sort of positive reinforcement, or at least an indicator that everybody's efforts haven't been completely for naught, would be helpful. (Also, I keep seeing these reports that Michiganders are doing better than average in the whole social distancing thing, yet, all I see on Facebook is that nobody's doing enough. Which the hell is it already?)
  
• But the issue for most this week isn't necessarily the extension of the original order, which anyone who pays attention saw coming. It's the introduction of additional restrictions at the same time that limit what goods can be purchased at your traditional "big-box' retailers, restrict travel between two or more residences, and would appear to ban businesses such as lawn care services from operating. It doesn't help that from the beginning...
  
• There's been a stunning lack of clarity from Governor Whitmer's office on a number of things. Between the supposed ban on prescribing medications being used as an experimental treatment for COVID-19 that, it turns out, wasn't a ban on anything other than hoarding, to the ongoing questions on what businesses are and are not allowed to remain open, it's safe to say the communication from Lansing has not been great, which only adds to the social media outrage and the panic buying that ensues every time a statement comes down from Lansing. But despite all that...
  
• I don't see how people find it so easy to believe that the governor of their state actively wants to destroy small businesses and put people out on the streets. If you spend enough time on social media, you'll find a large number of people that honestly believe that the economic devastation caused by this is intentional. Presuming that Whitmer would, in fact, like to be re-elected as governor come 2022 (yes, I'm well aware of the VP rumors), it would certainly seem that throwing Michigan into a recession would not be the most effective way to make that happen. Even going back to the argument over hydroxychloroquine, there were a rather disturbing amount of people that found it easier to believe that the governor of the state of Michigan actively wants people to die, than that perhaps she didn't want people panic buying that drug, leaving none for those who are prescribed it to treat other conditions.
  
  Perhaps I'm just the naive sort, but I find it hard to believe that our government, be it state or federal, actively wants a bunch of people to die from this. And while you could make an argument that at a federal level, we should have been more prepared for this, a pandemic of this scale only happens about once every 100 years or so. There's only so much you can really do to prepare to combat something that hasn't happened in over a century. And given what we know about how this disease spreads and how long it can lay dormant before symptoms show, if they do at all, what are your other options? Do nothing and let the death toll rise even higher? Britain and Sweden both tried some form of that. Britain already abandoned it not long before their prime minister ended up in intensive care, and Sweden is on the verge of doing so. Or you could go the exact opposite route...
  
• And let's be honest, the methods utilized by China and other countries to fight this thing never would fly here. America as a whole is a lot of things, but particularly tolerant of the government telling them what they can and can't do is not historically one of them. I seem to remember a war or two being fought over that sort of thing. Military-enforced national lockdowns? Mandatory apps installed on your smartphone? Good luck. Plenty of people in this country already believe the government has taken away too much of their freedom as it is, and that the current statewide "shelter-in-place" orders are already too draconian. Think they'd really stand for the "martial law" that would be required to enact a true national lockdown that some have suggested, and that other countries have actually enacted? And while we're on the subject of extremes...
  
• Is it possible that somewhere there is a middle ground between "reopen everything, damn the consequences" and "if you even mention the economy, you want people to die?" Can I, perhaps, not want people to die and at the same time not want my friends who own small businesses to lose everything they've worked for? Why does it have to be one or the other? I know of a few friends that have contracted COVID-19, and all have thankfully recovered. I also know of a few friends who are contemplating right now whether they'll be able to reopen their doors once all this has passed, one of whom has already had his business burned to the ground at one location, then broken into and ransacked at another. Obviously you can't equate these two things, but yet when you even bring up the latter, some are quick to brand you as "selfish" and "heartless" for doing so. Sure, there are a few loans out there for those sorts of things, but many banks have already stopped taking applications for them, and others are forgoing the process entirely because they don't know that they'll even be able to pay back that loan when they reopen, and can't afford to add another bill onto their current expenses. It seems there's a great deal of people who, as soon as you bring up the economy, immediately think stock traders and corporate retailers and CEO's of failing banks with multi-million dollar golden parachutes. Those aren't the people anybody's worried about. (Well, other than Congress.) it's your neighbors that poured their entire life's savings into opening up their own business, only to find themselves on the verge of losing it all. All this to say...
  
• Between the folks who have given themselves honorary Facebook PhD's, the people who have too much time on their hands and nothing better to do than shame the people who dare to leave their houses for any reason, I've come to the conclusion that there are more than a few people out there who could stand to self-quarantine from social media for a while.
  
  Myself included.
  
  Truth be told, over the last few weeks I find myself getting more and more irritated with the stupidity that seems to force its way across my news feed, be it the tinfoil hat-clad people suggesting that 5G somehow causes COVID-19, people who still somehow think this is an outright hoax perpetrated by the media because reasons, and people who are judgemental to an absurd extreme over the coming and going of others, best personified by this gem.
  
  
  
  That one was enough for me to log off from Facebook for the next 48 hours, lest I become "guy who goes on an unfriending spree," which ranks just below "guy who goes on an unfriending spree then brags about all the people he just unfriended" on the list of Facebook's Greatest Jackasses. Do the people insistent on taking the "shame everybody" route really think they're changing anybody's minds? Or are they just doing it to reinforce their own sense of superiority? At this point, I don't really see it being my place to tell anybody that they're wrong for doing whatever they need to cope with being "quarantined." Nor can I really begrudge the people who do feel as though something has been taken from them. (Well, most of you. Guy who's pissed the government's infringing on his right to drive without a license or insurance, you're the exception to that rule.) Let's be honest here: this isn't something that any of us have had to deal with in our lifetimes, nor have most of our parents or, in some cases, grandparents. But for most, this is, to say the least of it, a life-altering, for some even traumatic, experience. And while for some folks it may be easier than others, asking people not leave their homes and forgo most social contact with anyone that they don't share living quarters with for an indefinite amount of time is a pretty big ask. And as such, it gets pretty difficult at times to maintain anything resembling a positive attitude through it all.
  
  Hell, even my normal fun of sparring with folks in the various discussion groups on Facebook isn't quite as fun as it used to be once it becomes the only remaining acceptable social activity. As a bit of fun in between pints or commercial breaks, enjoyable enough. As your only means of social interaction?  A lot less so. Hell, I'd just went and rejoined one discussion topic group whose moderator-with-a-god-complex was a particularly heavy-handed sort, just to have something to occupy my time! But somehow, even with more time than I know what to do with and less than ever to do with it, it just seems like an even bigger waste, as though literally doing nothing would be more productive than this.
  
  Which leads me to think it might just be time to unplug til this all passes.
  
  For a guy whose hatred of everybody around him is codified in the very name of this place, I'd like to think I'm not quite as negative as one would assume from my online presence. But lately, every time I open up my phone to check the latest nonsense on Facebook, I find it increasingly difficult not to lose faith in the human race. And what's worse, I'm watching normally positive-minded people who usually stay above the fray jumping in to the argumentative abyss and losing a little piece of themselves every time they do. It hardly seems worth it anymore.
  
  So with that, I'm forcing myself to sign off from here for the time being. Will it last more than a day or two? A week? Who knows. But at this point, the attempt is probably worth it.
  
  Don't think for a second that, in doing this, I haven't thought about just where "guy who brags about turning off social media" rates on my above mentioned list.
  
  But that's a small price to pay for sanity, I suppose.

The Hastily-Produced Guide To November's City Election

     I'm not even supposed to be here today.

     ...or so I thought.

     Typically, city elections in Lapeer are fairly quiet affairs. (Countywide races? Those are a whole different animal.) Nobody typically campaigns on much of substance; usually campaign literature spends more time talking about the family of a candidate than spelling out any concrete plans on what they wish to accomplish while in office. But this year is a bit different. Maybe it's the fact that there is no elected incumbent in the mayoral race, or that multiple commissioners have chosen not to run for re-election, or because medical marijuana has stirred up quite a bit of local interest from those who normally don't much pay attention to city politics, but there seems a bit more... excitement this time around. But no more substance than normal. That's where we come in.

• Mayor. Longtime mayor Bill Sprague retired earlier this year, and given the choice between longtime commissioner and mayor pro-tem Debbie Marquardt and Glenn Alverson, the majority of commissioners (Dan Osentoski, A. Wayne Bennett, and Josh Atwood) selected the man who'd never held elected office in Lapeer, almost certainly because his own conservative political views line up with theirs. Not that such partisan nonsense should be making its way into city government, but sadly it does. And lest you think the mayoral position is that of a ceremonial figurehead... well, you're right. Kinda. For the most part, the mayor serves to break any ties that might come up in commission meetings, but can also make appointments to various boards, so it's certainly helpful to consider the people a candidate associates with as well; you may end up finding them in a position of influence in their own right. The candidates:
  
       Glenn Alverson. The man in the office currently, by virtue of having a few well-placed friends on the commission. Hasn't done much of campaigning of his own, save for a few posts on his Facebook that give the appearance of taking credit for things he had nothing to do with, campaign literature espousing vague sentiments like "traditional values," whatever that might mean, and a video that lists things Lapeer has and doesn't give a single reason to vote for him. Of course, those who have attended commission meetings in recent months can attest to why he might avoid specifics of his tenure so far; watching commission meetings in which he routinely addresses commissioners by the wrong names, and has to be basically led through meetings by the city manager and clerk, one gets the impression that he's still in a bit over his head. Endorsed by state senator Kevin Daley and his father-in-law, former mayor Chuck Treece, for what it's worth. One flyer of his lists the Downtown Development Authority among his qualifications, a position to which he was appointed solely because he was appointed mayor, and has done the bare minimum of showing up to a few meetings. [The DDA, for what it's worth, does not endorse candidates.]
  
  Of course, the idea that one should be praised for simply showing up and being a warm body in a seat seems to be particularly popular among his most vocal and ardent supporters.
  
  
  
  
  The person above scoffing at the idea of candidates doing the door-to-door thing and instead suggesting their constituents should bend the knee to them is Jeanette Osentoski, whose husband Dan happens to sit on the city commission and just happened to vote for Alverson's appointment. And if you should find yourself supporting a different candidate, as outgoing mayor Bill Sprague did? Well, prepare to be blasted in the local fish wrap as "showing your ugly side," and "dividing the community" by somebody who's well-versed at doing both of those things.
  
       Deb Marquardt. You want experience in office? Well, as a 15-year city commissioner, Marquardt has plenty of that. Endorsed by the last elected mayor, Bill Sprague, as well as city commission candidate Eric Cattane, and outgoing city commissioner Catherine Bostick. In addition to her tenure as a commissioner and four years as mayor pro-tem, she's also served as president of Holiday Depot for the last six years, spent years working for the Human Development Commission, and has served on the Lapeer Center Building Board, Suncrest Auxiliary, Emergency Needs Coalition, Lapeer Parks and Recreation Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals, and the Downtown Development Authority. Of anybody running or currently in an elected office in Lapeer, Marquardt has the most relevant experience, and more of the institutional memory than all of them. My hesitation here? Institutional memory doesn't mean much when the person who best knows how to affect change hasn't shown a great deal of willingness to do so when they actually had the power to do so.
  
       Bernard Jocuns. Yes, the "pot lawyer." Yes, he hosted a show on Solid State Radio, and if you think that in itself would be any kind of reason for an endorsement on the part of your not-so-humble correspondent, then you clearly have never tried to explain to a lawyer why he can't prank call people live on the air. And yes, of course, there's Food Stamp-Gate from a decade prior. But I've already seen the guy sending FOIA requests to the city asking about unnecessary and unneeded expenses. He's also, to date, the only mayoral candidate that has seen fit to personally stop by the home and downtown Lapeer business of yours truly and engage about what he'd like to see out of city government. Yes, he is fully on board with legalized adult-use marijuana sales in Lapeer, which tends to get him mocked by the older crowd and certain discussion topic group admins, but he's also the only candidate to acknowledge that it's also the best way to increase the tax base and get much-needed road work done without a straight-up tax increase. He's also been involved in the city as, among other things, a patron of the arts, sponsoring shows put on by both Stone's Throw Theatre and the Center For The Arts, in addition to his support of Lapeer's local autism resource center, the Forever Friends Network. If you're looking to move beyond the status quo, look no further.
  
  
• City Commission. Deb Marquardt is, of course, vacating her post to run for mayor. Catherine Bostick and A. Wayne Bennett are stepping down as well, leaving four people to fill four vacancies, meaning that everyone running is guaranteed a seat.. The only incumbent running again is Josh Atwood, while Jeff Pattison, Eric Cattane, and Tony Stroh are the newcomers. Of those three, Pattison hasn't put much out there, apart from his 30+ spent working for various governments in Oakland County as a property tax assessor. Since moving back to Lapeer from Portland, Stroh has been heavily involved in downtown as the proprietor of Stone's Throw Theatre, and lifelong resident Cattane has been involved in several charitable undertakings as part of the Lapeer Kiwanis club. Even though these are already settled races, it should still be said that this blog enthusiastically endorses both Stroh and Cattane, and believes that both are exactly the kind of new blood city government desperately needs. Full disclosure: Cattane is a longtime friend of mine, and Stone's Throw is a sponsor, of sorts, of Solid State.
  
  
  That's about all the major races to be decided in Lapeer, save for school millages where applicable. But as ever, keep in mind that if you're going to try and win friends and influence people, this...
  
  
  
  
  

  ...is probably not the best way to go about it.

Can Hockey In Lapeer County Be Saved?

     The future of hockey in Lapeer County may be in doubt.

     And it didn't have to be that way.

     Out of seemingly nowhere Monday, the website of Lapeer's County Press dropped a major bombshell: after nearly 20 years, the rink and accompanying bar Louie's Sports Tavern will be shutting down for good at the end of April. The unnamed author of the article went on to cite "social media, online gaming and other sedentary activities" as reasons the owners couldn't make the hockey arena viable.

     Now, when one considers that County Press and Lapeer Area View owner Rick Burrough is also co-owner of the Polar Palace and Louie's, it makes a bit more sense why they would be first to announce this news, before even the venue itself.

     Of course, as one would expect given that the paper and the arena share a common co-owner, the article conveniently glosses over the fact that the experience on the restaurant side has always has been lackluster at best. Your not-so-humble correspondent can personally attest to multiple issues over the years with consistency and quality of the food served, a promotion the venue failed to deliver on altogether when it didn't get quite the response it hoped for, and any number of nights where, even when the place was at half or less capacity, you might wait twenty to thirty minutes for a server to acknowledge your existence, and up to an hour just for appetizers.

     This is where one might hope that the place could yet get a new lease on life. That with proper management running the show, both the bar and the arena could thrive again.

     Enter Drake MacKenzie, a self-described "local boy" who is as much a true believer in Flint and Lapeer as viable hockey markets as anyone you'll find. And he's putting his money where his mouth is.

     A Lapeer native, MacKenzie is the commissioner of the upstart Interstate Hockey League, a 12-team low-level minor hockey league scheduled to launch this fall. One of those twelve teams, the Lapeer Nepessings, was slated to play at the Polar Palace starting in November. He'd just agreed to a lease the week prior which would have committed the Nepessings to two years of playing their games at the arena and resulted in sorely needed upgrades being made to the rink. 

     MacKenzie, 24, admittedly seems an unlikely person to represent the potential future of hockey in Lapeer County. He is, by his own admission, loud and abrasive, and his propensity to chirp at opposing players, teams, even leagues, has not diminished any as he's moved from the ice to the front office. It's fair to say he's not exactly universally liked. As he sits in the Solid State Radio studio the day the announcement came down, he shows me texts and messages he's received from players in the rival Federal Hockey League mocking the news of his hometown arena's closure. But none of that seems to have deterred him from his vision of Lapeer as a hockey hotbed. "This is a great sports town, a great community."

     So when the announcement came that his hometown would be losing its home ice, MacKenzie sprung into action, spending most of Monday afternoon in contact with management and ownership of the venue, hoping to save hockey in Lapeer County. He says there is an offer on the table from his group to lease the building, and potentially purchase it outright within a year or two.

     But Rick Burrough wants no part of that. "He wants to sell to a company for a warehouse," MacKenzie laments.
 
     Of course, the loss of the county's only hockey arena has ramifications that reach far beyond the loss of a professional hockey team, a fact not lost on MacKenzie.
 
      "The thing that is sad, is that this is the death sentence for Lapeer High School hockey. That is the death sentence, probably, for Alliance," the hockey team consisting of players from Almont, North Branch, Dryden, Lakeville, Imlay City, and Goodrich, towns that no longer have enough players to fill out hockey teams of their own. "Lapeer's girls program went to the states this year, their youth program. For a second or third-year program, they've made tremendous strides. There had to be forty girls out there, which is something you would have never seen. What happens to them?"

     Certainly the Polar Palace holds a special significance to MacKenzie. "I scored my first goal there. My dad laid down the first sheet of ice there. I learned to skate there. I think I had my first date there! That place is my home away from home, and just to throw it away because (of) poor management is heartbreaking."
 
     And the idea that Facebook and video games are to blame for the potential demise of hockey in Lapeer? "That’s a quitters attitude."

     "Get kids excited to play. You can’t just open the doors to the place and hope people show up. When’s the last time they had a community outreach? Never. Did they ever contact sponsors? No. Why does Oxford High School drive an extra 20 miles to Troy? Why doesn’t Davison play here? Why has there never been another pro team? Or why has there never been a junior team? Why do we run both sheets of ice every year except for the last two?"

     The options to save the Polar Palace seem somewhat limited. Barring some sort of community-based fundraising effort, the odds are rather slim of keeping it open as a hockey venue. Of course, as mentioned earlier, the co-owner of the arena also happens to own both local newspapers in town, and as such, isn't entirely insulated from public pressure as long as he still owns a business that is very much dependent on local advertising and community support.

     Regardless of what decision they ultimately make, however, MacKenzie still sounds as optimistic as ever about the future of hockey here, and as committed as ever to making it work.

     "This is my home. I'm not going anywhere."

The Unvarnished Guide To Election Day 2018

Well, it's a slight bit earlier than normal.

But still well within my normal last-minute timeframe.

Election day is this Tuesday, which means it's about time for the usual comprehensive rundown of everything that's going to be on your ballot. Every candidate that will appear on your ballot for a particular race is included, even the ones that exist in name only and for no particular reason other than ballot access, like the U.S. Taxpayers Party and the Natural Law Party. There may be updates between now and Tuesday as my vacation schedule allows if something major is overlooked. You may notice the lack of entries for the various boards of regents for your public universities. As I am not a graduate of any of these fine institutions (go Mott... Bears, I think?), I don't feel particularly qualified to dispense advice there, apart from imploring you to vote out any incumbents at Michigan State University for obvious reasons. With all that out of the way, let's get off to the races...

• Governor. This one shook out about as expected, as Brian Calley's attempts to paint himself as an experienced politician who is also a political outsider who is also Rick Snyder 2.0 fell flat, the money and experience won out on the Democratic side, and sanity won out on the Libertarian side.
  
       Bill Schuette (R)- He's been campaigning for governor pretty much since Rick Snyder took office. Of course, he lost your not-so-humble correspondent's vote at any point in the future when he took the fight against gay marriage to the Supreme Court at great taxpayer expense. Despite claiming he'll respect the will of the voters on Proposal 1, that didn't stop him from shutting down dispensaries when Michigan legalized medical marijuana. Nor did it stop him from fighting for the state's voter-overturned emergency manager law by claiming that voters don't have the right to elect their local officials. Nor did his previously stated deference to federal law stop him from filing suit to dismantle the Affordable Care Act while claiming he wants to protect coverage of pre-existing conditions, while offering up no plan for how he'd do so. Claimed Apart from his role in prosecuting the Flint water crisis, Schuette's tenure as Attorney General has mostly been marked by high-profile fights for mostly ideological causes that don't really help the average citizen in this state, plus the Flint water crisis investigation in which there has not yet been a single conviction while simultaneously defending the state in Flint water-based lawsuits and getting called out by a federal judge for "superficial posturing." If any two words best describe Schuette, it's those.
  
       Gretchen Whitmer (D)- The "establishment" candidate on the Dem side. Which means, at least, that she has some semblance of experience in actually getting policy passed. Of course, it also means things like being in the pocket of Blue Cross Blue Shield, where her father was formerly a CEO, and which naturally leaves her opposed to any attempt at single-payer health care. Other than that, she checks most of the Democratic party-line boxes, including a $15 minimum wage and marijuana legalization. Claims she can "fix the damn roads" with $2 billion in additional spending funded by fuel taxes. Has the support of the UAW and the MEA, as one might expect.
  
       Bill Gelineau (L)- From the primary: "We may have found a capital-L libertarian that actually deviates from the typical "taxation is theft/let businesses do whatever they want" playbook. In a pleasant surprise for a libertarian candidate, he fully believes in climate change and clean energy, that businesses shouldn't be allowed to avoid their responsibility to be good corporate citizens, and that the state should have some role in protecting the environment. Naturally, he's also fully in support of marijuana legalization and assisted suicide, and against using National Guard troops to fight any foreign conflict where Congress has not passed a declaration of war."
  
       Jennifer Kurland (G)- School board trustee in Redford. Devotes far more time and space on her website to the Flint water crisis than anybody else running. Other than that, it's standard Green party fare here, particularly in environmental issues (including a call to shut down Enbridge Line 5), which even her spiel on economic issues comes back to quite a bit. Wants to get rid of school-of-choice and charter schools altogether, as well as offer free tuition to public universities.
  
       Todd Schleiger (U.S. Taxpayers, technically?) An independent in all but name, as he doesn't support much of the U.S. Taxpayer's Party (Constitution Party in every other state) platform, which includes criminalizing sexual behavior it deems immoral, opposes the federal Voting Rights Act, and is generally the Tea Party without that pesky "separation of church and state" thing. As such, they essentially refuse to support his campaign, and there is no mention of the party on his campaign website. Proposes to eliminate the state property tax on primary residences, plans to reallocate lottery funds back to schools, and otherwise restructure the tax system, in addition to bringing 500,000 jobs back to Michigan.
  
       Keith Butkovich (Natural Law)- Another candidate whose party is irrelevant here; Butkovich himself refers to it as the "Ballot Access Party." Doesn't appear to have much of a stance on many issues, but we do know that he wants to make auto insurance voluntary, eliminate income tax (he expresses a general belief that "taxation is theft"), abolish roundabouts, and reduce the State Board of Education. Basically a Libertarian in all but name.
   
• U.S. Senator. This one's pretty straightforward. Three-term incumbent takes on a political newcomer, an ideological purist, and a couple completely incoherent people.
  
       Debbie Stabenow (D)- The incumbent, and senior senator in the state, at that. The rare Dem in this state that actually has the backing of major farmers' groups; she's the lone statewide Democrat to carry the Michigan Farm Bureau's endorsement. Her record, for better or worse, really speaks for itself at this point. Has been touting her legislative attempts to drive down the cost of prescription drugs, as well as efforts to make sure the federal government does business with manufacturers who make their products in the U.S.
  
       John James (R)- A businessman and military veteran with no prior elected experience. Says all the things you'd expect somebody running on the Republican side of this race to say. Carries Donald Trump's endorsement, for what that's worth, and as such shares all his policy beliefs with the exception of trade issues. Ran by-and-large a positive campaign both in the primary and general elections, instead until recently primarily focusing on where he stands on the issues with a minimal of extravagant promises.
  
       Marcia Squier (G)- Originally planned to run for a House seat in Oakland County, decided to do this instead. Claims Stabenow isn't progressive enough and is too "corporatist."  
  
       George E Huffman III (U.S. Taxpayers)- Member of a few boards in Shiawassee County. As far as can be told from a glance at his Facebook page, which is the only place any info on this guy exists, he believes Taxation is theft, the Great Lakes need to be protected, and doesn't respond to questions about any other views he might have.
  
       John Howard Wilhelm (Natural Law)- This interview with my radio colleague Tom Sumner is about all the info I can dig up on this guy. Sounds like he, like Butkovich, views the party strictly as ballot access. Wishes to abolish term limits, for similar reasons as I've stated in the past: term limits put the institutional knowledge in the hands of lobbyists and non-elected staffers. His website lays out some other... interesting positions from there..
    
• U.S. House. Incumbent in a solidly red district taking on surprisingly, not the lobbyist and career politician who ran against him last time, but said lobbyist's progressive primary challenger. Also, an independent whose stances are impossible to pin down and a Green Party candidate, for some reason.
  
       Paul Mitchell (R)- Still not the hair care guy. Still, more or less, unresponsive to his constituents back home, especially in Lapeer County, his supposed home these days. Still the first person in line to defend anything the president says or does, and has spent most of his term in office doing just that and not much else. Claims to want to protect the Great Lakes, but good luck finding anything he's done to that end.
  
       Kimberly Bizon (D)- An environmental activist who decided to run for political office. Supports health care for all, more funding for public schools and teachers, fair policies for family farms, and is solidly in the progressive camp on most issues. Though she does point out that, contrary to the stereotype, she's not looking to take anybody's guns away. That said: if the mix-up with Lapeer's Treat Walk is any indication, her campaign staff may want to invest in a calendar or two.
  
       Jeremy Peruski (I)- Possibly the hardest to pin down of any candidate in this race. As far as we can tell, he's anti-tariff, pro-simplifying the tax code while in support of closing corporate loopholes, opposes Trump's handling of environmental issues and the EPA under Scott Pruitt in general, and has made much of his support for skilled trades and vocational training.
  
       Harley Mikkelson (G)- Green Party, for everything that's worth. Little to no information online.
  
  
• State Senate. No matter who wins, you're basically getting a Republican here. Two candidates who've been in politics for quite a long time. Of all the races not to have a third-party challenger.
  
       Kevin Daley (R)- Consumers Energy *really* likes them some Daley, and have put some serious money behind him. Of course, having your primary opponent making vaguely threatening statements against the reps of said energy companies does that. Unapologetic supporter of "right-to-work" who also voted against Medicare expansion.
  
       Cynthia Luczak (D?)- Bay County Clerk. Her website is rather light on all but the most generic of stances, and there's a reason for that: other than perhaps Lapeer County commissioner Cheryl Clark, Luczak is probably the most conservative Democrat running in any race locally. Lines up fairly well with the NRA's stances on firearms, and she's anti-abortion to boot. Makes one wonder why she bothers running as a Democrat.
  
       Note, however, that in Sunday's County Press write-up for the seat, Daley was rather vague on answers for issues like protecting our Great Lakes and curbing the opioid crisis, while Luczak's answers to those questions were more concrete.
  
  
• State Representative. When last we left this seat, Gary Howell beat out about 88,317 challengers to replace Todd Courser in the state House, then handily beat Margaret Guerrero DeLuca again to win a full term in office. It'd be an uphill battle this time around if the Dem were even trying, but... well, more on that in a minute.
  
       Gary Howell (R)- The incumbent. I've had a few issues with Howell's votes and stances in the time he's been in office, but by and large, he's done exactly what he's said he would do, and has made an effort to push new transparency laws through the House. Has been seen around town and responding to his constituents far more than the guy he replaced in the office. As he's already won this seat twice handily, there's not much reason to think he faces much of a challenge.
  
       Chris Giles (D)- Part of me half expected (and kind of hoped) ex-Imlay City mayor and two-time runner-up for this seat  DeLuca would go for it again. But as such, political newcomer Giles is the only candidate running. Strongly aligned with the Bizon-Batterbee "progressive" wing of the area party. Hey, when you're already cannon fodder against an incumbent in a solidly red county, why not go for broke? That said: he hasn't been easy to track down at all, having done virtually zero campaigning and holding no town hall/meet and greet events since jumping into the race. Hell, what might be the only liberal-friendly forum in Lapeer county had no luck booking him! Claims he'll implement a "Statewide Guaranteed Jobs Program," and offers no further details on that. Also claims he'll expand FOIA to the governor's office. Y'know, the bills that Gary Howell regularly introduces that end up getting left to die in the Senate.
  
  
• Secretary of State. Ruth Johnson is out, so this one is up for grabs.
  
       Mary Treder Lang (R)- Supports no-reason absentee voting, but wants any change to require showing up at a Secretary of State office with ID. Believes current campaign finance law is being adequately enforced. Wants to purge the voter rolls of the deceased and those who are registered in multiple states. She does, however, admit there's no evidence of voter fraud based on the above.
  
       Jocelyn Benson (D)- Former Wayne State University Law School dean. Supports expanding voting access, including the provisions that make up Proposal 3. Also wants to make Michigan's political system more transparent, as evidenced by her call to require instant disclosure of all political and lobbying money.
  
       Gregory Stempfle (L)- Wants to repeal no-fault insurance, extend the length of driver's license renewals, and is in support of no-reason absentee voting and automatic voter registration. Might have my vote just for his support of ranked-choice voting, which is an objectively a better and more accurate system of picking electoral candidates than the current first-past-the-post system.
  
       Robert Gale (U.S. Taxpayers)- No website. No social media. No info anywhere online. Why do these people even bother running?
  
  
• Attorney General. Since Bill Schuette is term-limited out of the post he's been using to campaign for governor for the last 8 years, this one is wide open.
  
       Tom Leonard (R)- Former state Speaker of the House and former Genesee County assistant prosecutor. Supports specialty courts for the mentally ill and drug offenders, as well as making it easier for criminal offenders to find employment after being released from jail.
  
       Dana Nessel (D)- You may remember her as the lawyer who brought the case that overturned Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage. Naturally, supports both Proposals 1 and 2. Like her GOP opponent, supports specialized courts in each jurisdiction. Wants to establish a police conduct review team and another unit to look into wrongful convictions.
  
       Lisa Lane Gioia (L)- The only candidate to not have been a practicing attorney at any point, or to even have a law degree. You may remember her as the Libertarian candidate for the U.S. House seat now occupied by Paul Mitchell. In that race, she stuck largely to the company line of nonintervention, ending the IRS and the Department of Education, and in general getting the federal government out of... well, everything. As far as issues relevant to this race, she's against civil asset forfeiture and prosecuting non-violent drug-related crimes. Supports Proposal 1 and claims Proposal 2 doesn't go far enough, in that the two major parties still essentially would control the process.
  
       Chris Graveline (I)- Former assistant prosecuting attorney in Detroit. As a strongly nonpartisan candidate, has no desire to take on partisan policy issues in office. Does not support Proposal 1, but says he will not fight against it if it passes. Supports Proposal 2.
  
       Gerald T Van Sickle (U.S. Taxpayers)- No website. No social media. No info anywhere online. Why does this party even exist?
  
  
• County Commission. Only one district actually has a challenger this time around, as Brenden Miller has thrown his hat into the ring to replace incumbent Cheryl Clark. And this is an odd race indeed, as Clark appears to have very little support from her own party; in fact, for much of last week, you could find signs for Clark's Republican challenger at the Lapeer County Democratic Party office! Of course, the fact that Clark's stances don't really line up with her party (she's on record as being against gay marriage and has stated she believes in the doctored Planned Parenthood videos as well) and that she isn't much seen by her constituents may have something to do with that. That said, Miller was very much on board with Gary Glenn's candidacy for State Senate, and regular readers know my thoughts on Glenn are well documented.
  
  
• Probate Judge. For the first time in 18 years, Justus Scott has a challenger in this race. Mike Sharkey, still in his first term as county prosecutor, has become the latest contestant in Team Konschuh's attempt to pack the courts with more favorable staff. The first question that came to mind, and indeed the one I posed to Judge Scott, is "how did you piss Byron Konschuh off enough for him to sic his lawyer after you in this race?" Because clearly there is only one reason Sharkey would already be looking to move up from his current post. Scott wasn't even sure of this; he'd recommended Konschuh for prosecutor originally, and hired Konschuh's wife when she was let go elsewhere! No good deed goes unpunished, I suppose.
  
  When I posed the question to Sharkey as to why he was already gunning for higher office not even half a term in, and further why he felt Scott needed to be challenged, he responded that he believes there is a great amount of corruption in the county courthouse that needs to be fought, and that he can... somehow... fight it better as a judge instead of as prosecutor? Naturally, he appears entirely unaware that plenty of said corruption centers around the man he fought on behalf of in court, and that about none of it has to do with probate court. He's the first prosecutor to decide he can't handle the caseload of the office, asking the county to hire a separate counsel. Still hasn't figured out why Konschuh having an outstanding debt to Sharkey to the tune of $400,0000 in legal fees might be a slight bit of a conflict of interest. It doesn't mean he needs to be elevated to higher office, it means he should probably step down from the one he's in now.
• Lapeer Community Schools Board. Peggy Bush and Wendy Byard are both stepping down from the board, leaving four newcomers and a former board member to fill two seats.
  
       Allen Landosky- You might remember him as one of approximately 65,273 candidates who filed to run against Todd Courser in the recall election against him. Didn't do a whole lot to distinguish himself from the crowd (his campaign page racked up a whole 20 likes and offered virtually zero information about him). Go ahead and read up on his few comments from that race here and here. Has done virtually zero campaigning this time around; I don't even have a damn link to post!
  
       Austin Franzel- Has made some very, very unfortunate statements in recent years, and his attempts to explain them away (not so much apologizing as blaming "reverse racism") ring somewhat hollow And to hear some people who know him tell it, he's not exactly a great character guy apart from the alleged racism. As far as his actual platform... well, he really, really likes guns. That's about the extent of it. Seriously; other than the initial write-up from the local papers of record, it's all his campaign page consists of.
  
       Bradly Haggadone- Possibly the youngest candidate ever to get elected to the office, Haggadone served one term, only to lose in the next election to Lisa Novak and (regrettably) Jan Peabody. Endorsed by both retiring board members, Wendy Byard and Peggy Bush, as well as the Lapeer Education Association.
  
       Summer Putnam- Member of the Lapeer Schools District Advisory Council, for what that's worth. Haven't found much on her platform that extends beyond this flyer, but admittedly, it's largely a more realistic and substantive platform than most of her competition. Also has the support of the LEA and former board member Jan Watz.
  
       Maurice Freed- Another candidate with virtually no online presence, instead choosing to communicate solely through poorly written flyers. Apart from the fact that he apparently wants to fix a lot of things that have already been fixed or that would be out of his control as a local board member, a few questions stand out for me...
  
  -What does obesity have to do with opioids? Hell, what does "the family unit" have to do with obesity? Having both my parents around didn't stop me from getting fat.
  
  -How is any of his work experience (all of it as a real estate agent, mortgage broker, and... a PI?) relevant to the position? Does he have any experience that might actually be relevant?
  
  -Why! Are there so! Damn! Many! Exclamation points!
  
  Carries endorsements from the "Tea Party Patriots" and that's about it. Take that for what you will.
  . 
• State Supreme Court. The two Republican-nominated incumbents are Kurtis Wilder and Beth Clement. Well, sort of. The state GOP essentially pulled its support from Clement because of her vote to allow Proposal 2 to make it onto the ballot, going so far as to leave her off party campaign literature. The two Democratic-endorsed candidates are Sam Bagenstos and Megan Cavanaugh, whose father served on the court.
   
• State Board of Education. Two seats to fill here. Republican Richard Zeile is the lone incumbent. The other Republican, accountant Tami Carlone, has no background or experience in education. The Democrats are Judy Pritchett, a former educator and
  chief academic officer for the Macomb Intermediate School District, and Southfield Community Anti-Drug Coalition director Tiffany Tilley, who also has no educational background. Libertarian candidate John Tatar is insane. (Refer back to the gubernatorial section of my last primary guide for more on that.) The other Libertarian, Scotty Boman (no, not that one), is a physics professor at multiple metro Detroit colleges and former state Libertarian Party chair. Douglas Levesque really, really doesn't like gay people or separation of church and state. Green Party candidate Sherry Wells has been involved on a local level, though she's let her own teaching certificate expire. Working Class Party candidate Mary Anne Hering is also a former teacher.
              
• Ballot Proposals. There's three statewide proposals this time around.
  
  Proposal 1- Fairly straightforward; would legalize recreational marijuana and regulate it under the same system as medicinal. Apart from law enforcement, some group called Healthy and Productive Michigan, and Facebook Discussion Reefer Madness Groupthink Topics Page admins, not very many people have come out against this one. And for good reason; there's really not a particularly good argument against it other than "it's still not legal at a federal level." It's another source of revenue for the state, it'd make it less worthwhile for black-market dealers to continue doing what they're doing, and would make it less burdensome for medical patients as well.
  
  Proposal 2- The "Voters Not Politicians" Proposal. Would place the drawing of electoral districts in the hands of a 13-member commission, made up of four members of each of the two major parties, and 5 nonpartisans. All told, it looks to be a better method of drawing the districts than the current approach of "whoever's in power draws the lines more-or-less as they see fit." Some critics cite it's cost as an issue, while others, mostly libertarians and independents, don't approve of the way it writes a two-party system into the law. Others still simply don't like that the party in charge won't be able to draw districts to their advantage, though they'd never admit as such.
  
  Proposal 3- I'm rather split on this one... on one hand, this would officially make no-reason absentee voting law, as well as allow same-day voting registration and automatic registration with driver's license renewal. On the other hand, it would also bring back straight-ticket voting, which I've been against from the start, on the basis that "if you can't do the work to decide the person that's worth voting for, you probably shouldn't be voting." That said: How difficult is it currently to obtain an absentee ballot? And how closely do they vet to prove you'll not be near your precinct on Election Day? (The answers, at least back when both my parents worked for the City of Detroit's Election Commission, were "not very" and "not at all." Has this changed?)
  
  As always, social media links have been posted for all candidates that have them, so if you've still got questions I can't answer here, ask them. For additional info, this is always a good resource. In a few cases, we also have interviews they've done with colleagues of mine. In a disheartening amount of cases, I don't have a website or Facebook page at all to go off of.
  
  That seems counterproductive, to say the least of it.
  
  If you can't do the work of answering to your future constituents, you probably shouldn't be running.

The Aftermath of Yesterday's Primary

     Another primary has come and gone, and with few surprises.

     Indeed, things more or less played out about the way I anticipated, but there's much to break down, so let's skip the long-winded intro and get to it:

• Governor. Brian Calley insisted on trying to walk this fine line between being a "political outsider" and being Rick Snyder 2.0. Ultimately he couldn't pull off the former, so he embraced the latter, but despite the much-touted economic comeback, Snyder is not exactly the name you want to hitch your wagon to. Patrick Colbeck never had the name recognition among the general public, favorite though he might have been among the Tea party and religious set. Jim Hines, even less so, despite his appeal to the more moderate wing. Schuette was always the man to beat here; he's been effectively campaigning for the job since he took his current post, waging high-profile ideological battles for much of his first term. Then, of course, Flint happened, and he seized on the opportunity to distance himself from the man who would be his primary opponent this year.
  
  The Democratic results don't come as much of a shock, either. Once Mike Duggan and Dan Kildee announced they wouldn't be running, former Senate Minority Leader Gretchen Whitmer became the new chosen one. I tend to think either of the former would have had a better run at this based on name recognition; the mayor who's being credited for engineering Detroit's turnaround, and the congressman advocating for Flint on a national level, but Kildee's in his current spot for life if he wants it, and Duggan... well, I can't explain that one. But even beyond the somewhat Hillary/Bernie-ish dynamic of this one (establishment centrist vs. progressive idealist), it wasn't hard to predict this outcome. Whitmer had support from the UAW and the MEA, plus quite a few big-shots in the party. Support for Abdul El-Sayed came more from the progressive activist wing of the party; people like Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Shaun King. Big on ideals and grassroots activism, but lower on financial backing compared to the organizations that fund campaigns like Whitmer's, and that still counts for a lot. Unless, of course, you're Shri Thanedar, and nobody takes you seriously. You've got to give Whitmer credit: "fix the damn roads" is the kind of bumper-sticker slogan people remember. Of course, there's an elephant in the room to be addressed here: There is a not-statistically-insignificant number of people who have said they wouldn't even consider El-Sayed specifically because he's a Muslim without knowing anything else about the man... well, "racist" may not be the right word for it. But there's a rather loud group of prejudiced folk out there, and I'm not gonna say that didn't factor in enough to scare Dems out of throwing him up in a general election.  Enough that it swung the election to Whitmer, though? Doubt it..
  
  Even the Libertarians managed to pick the candidate that would be most palatable to the general electorate, as Bill Gelineau won out. Sorry, but John Tatar comes off as the kind of guy that believes fluoride is a mind control agent, chemtrails are a thing and whose first words during any police encounter are "am I being detained?" Of course, it's hard to see Gelineau having much of a chance in the general election, other than managing to siphon off a few votes from those disillusioned with the two major-party candidates.
  
• U.S. Senate. Really thought Sandy Pensler's relentless attack ads on John James might have swayed this thing in his favor, but apparently GOP voters saw right through a guy whose positions on everything have... evolved, to say the least. James is definitely the candidate of the two that had the better shot in the general, though; military veteran, businessman, first run for office as opposed to being a perennial candidate, and by and large a more optimistic message. Hard to see Debbie Stabenow being particularly vulnerable, but James should put up a good fight.
  
• U.S. House. Amazingly, the actual progressive won! Kimberly Bizon takes this one over Frank Accavitti, so where the former Eastpointe mayor ends up next is anyone's guess; he ran for the seat last time and lost. Not sure how much of a hope she has in one of the most conservative districts in the state, though.
  
• State Senate. To say the least of it, your not-so-humble correspondent is ecstatic that noted bigot Gary Glenn will not hold an elected office come the end of this year. The local guy takes this one, as Kevin Daley wins by about 5,000 votes. It was always going to be a hard sell for Glenn, though, especially with the amount of money Consumers Energy spent against him. But you'll basically have two Republicans to pick from in November, as Cynthia Luczak won by a long shot on the Democratic side. (My favored candidate, Joni Batterbee, finished a distant third.)
  
• Library Millage. Truth be told, this is a disappointment. But there's a quote I came across on the topic that put things into perspective: "People need to think of it as a negotiation. The library board swung for the fences, as they should have, and proposed a dream scenario, the Taj Mahal of libraries. Voters called them out on it. Now they can come back with something else and we can reconsider." Of course you're going to shoot for the moon the first time out, but that makes it more likely that voters would accept something less extravagant down the road. The fact that they only came up about 1500 votes short of getting their best-case scenario suggests to me they could come back with a more pared-down version and get the votes needed. to pass it.
  
  Or maybe I'm giving people too much credit.

The Hastily-Assembled Authoritative Guide To Primary Day 2018

     Has it really been almost two years since I last posted one of these?

     Indeed, things have been relatively radio silent around here since November 2016, mostly because I've been trying to keep the silence on the actual radio to a minimum. Admittedly, in between trying to fill way too many hours of airtime a week on the radio, cover elections in Flint, and not lose my damn mind in the process, this place kind of fell by the wayside. Not that I ever stopped keeping up on politics and news of the world, but time just didn't allow for me to keep putting out longform articles like these.

     That, obviously, has changed, and I should be able to get back to semi-irregularly posting here again. (Especially if certain formerly-anonymous corruption-based pages should ever rise up from the swamp again.) That said, we have a primary on Tuesday, so let's get to it!

• Governor. Rick Snyder is, of course, term limited, and as such, the leading candidates on the GOP side were known well before any announcements were made, but there are a few long-shot bids as well, one from a Tea Party darling who's a favorite in more religious circles, the other a doctor by trade with something more of a centrist message. The Democratic side, meanwhile, has its seemingly pre-ordained choice along with a few political newcomers seeking to push the party further left.
  
       Brian Calley (R)- The most pragmatic of any candidate on the Republican side. Most recently spearheaded that failed initiative to make Michigan's legislature a part-time one. Paints himself as a political outsider or the continuation of the status quo, depending on which is convenient at the moment. Is basically Rick Snyder 2.0, for all that it implies. Along with Schuette, is getting a decent amount of funding from dark-money super PAC's whose contributors are largely unknown.
  
       Bill Schuette (R)- He's been campaigning for governor pretty much since Rick Snyder took office. Of course, he lost my vote at any point in the future when he took the fight against gay marriage to the Supreme Court at our expense. Apart from his role in prosecuting the Flint water crisis, Schuette's tenure as Attorney General has mostly been marked by high-profile fights for mostly ideological causes that don't really help the average citizen in this state.
  
       Patrick Colbeck (R)- If Calley and Schuette are just too moderate for you, then here's your guy. His plan to literally rewrite history in the mold of long-discredited "historian" David Barton has been documented at length here in the past. Then there's the racist smear attacks on Democratic challenger Abdul El-Sayed, that even other Republicans have chastised him for. Also the same guy that whined on social media about the sacrifice he made going to work in the legislature for a mere $70,000+ a year.
  
       Jim Hines (R)- The Saginaw obstetrician is big on ideas, a little less so on how to accomplish them. He's made education a centerpiece of his campaign, but offers little beyond "local control" and "abolish Common Core." Wants to fix the roads, but has no plan on how to fund them, other than saying he won't need to raise taxes to do it. Good luck with that.
  
       Gretchen Whitmer (D)- The "establishment" candidate on the Dem side. Which means, at least, that she has some semblance of experience in actually getting policy passed. Of course, it also means things like being in the pocket of Blue Cross Blue Shield, where her father was formerly a CEO, and which naturally leaves her opposed to any attempt at single-payer health care. Other than that, she checks most of the Democratic party-line boxes, including a $15 minimum wage and marijuana legalization. Has the support of the UAW and the MEA, along with other dark-money organizations whose backers are unknown.
  
       Abdul El-Sayed (D)- Detroit's health commissioner. Has been at the helm of several successful public health initiatives in Detroit, and as such his words on issues in that sphere carry far more weight than those of somebody who's being bankrolled by the biggest health insurer in the state. Carries the endorsement of numerous progressive leaders, and says the right things to appeal to that demographic, including his refusal to take campaign money from corporate lobbyists, though he may ultimately be admittedly a bit much of an idealist to be effective in this office, especially as somebody who has never held any elected office.
  
       Quick aside here: It's truly incredible how much intolerance is still being displayed publicly in this state, and it plays a large part in why El-Sayed is fighting an uphill battle here. It seems not a day goes by that somebody around here is yelling about how all Muslims hate America, or want to install sharia law, or some other ridiculous thing. Which would be like suggesting all Christians hate gay people, or don't believe in science, or something equally absurd. And before some mouthbreather jumps in to remind us that "they throw gay people off buildings in Muslim countries," which is rich coming from people who vote for politicians that want to outright criminalize homosexuality, Abdul has publicly supported efforts to include LGBTQ individuals in Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act. Now admittedly, telling Colbeck "all Muslims hate you!" didn't help the "Muslims are not a group-thinking monolith" argument cause at all, justified though it may be. But when dealing with people who are of the mindset that your way of life is not compatible with the very country you call home, it's hard to blame the guy for being angry.
  
       Shri Thanedar (D)- A self-funded millionaire with several failed business ventures, no political experience, no record of public service, no commitment to any real set of political values, and little more driving him than narcissism and the overwhelming need to be liked, runs for high political office. Sound familiar? Even beyond his lack of qualification for the job, it's become abundantly clear over the last few months that Thanedar is not the progressive candidate he purports to be, and his platform proposals come with a woeful lack of detail. Oh, and there's also the leaving animals for dead after doing chemical testing on them.
  
  While we're here, though, a few things that have no influence on my vote: Whether a candidate was born in this country (Jennifer Granholm wasn't, Rick Snyder was, and both were pretty terrible), how well he speaks his second language (a lot of his detractors on this point seem to have enough trouble with their first), his nationality or his religion. It's rather disappointing, but not entirely surprising, how many people in this state don't know the difference between India, Indonesia, and any Middle Eastern country, and assume that because he's brown-skinned, "he must be Muslim and therefore wants sharia law!" The ignorance is really astounding.
  
       Bill Gelineau (L)- Yes, for the first time ever, there's an actual gubernatorial primary for the Libertarians in Michigan! And further, we may have found a capital-L libertarian that actually deviates from the typical "taxation is theft/let businesses do whatever they want" playbook. In a pleasant surprise for a libertarian candidate, he fully believes in climate change and clean energy, that businesses shouldn't be allowed to avoid their responsibility to be good corporate citizens, and that the state should have some role in protecting the environment. Naturally, he's also fully in support of marijuana legalization and assisted suicide, and against using National Guard troops to fight any foreign conflict where Congress has not passed a declaration of war..
  
       John Tatar (L)-  Right upfront in his intro blurb, he invokes "sovereignty" and "De Jure" governorship. Believes smart meters are government surveillance and the junk science that says they give off harmful electromagnetic radiation. In fact, it's the first issue he brings up on his website. Essentially, he's exactly the caricature you picture a Libertarian candidate to be. Wants to eliminate state income tax entirely, of course, along with several other taxes, and wishes to do away with the State Senate entirely.
• U.S. Senator: A tough race for anybody looking to unseat the incumbent. Many have declared their candidacy at one point or another, from Trump campaign staffer Lena Epstein, to former Michigan Supreme Court Justice Robert Young, to awful musician Bob "Kid Rock" Ritchie. Ultimately, the candidates that made it this far are a bit lesser known than those.
  
       Debbie Stabenow (D)- The incumbent, and senior senator in the state, at that. The rare Dem in this state that actually has the backing of major farmers' groups. Her record, for better or worse, really speaks for itself at this point. Not being primaried this time around, though a few toyed with the idea.
  
       John James (R)- A businessman and military veteran with no prior elected experience. Says all the things you'd expect somebody running on the Republican side of this race to say. Carries Donald Trump's endorsement, for what that's worth. Runs by-and-large a positive campaign, leaving most of the attacks to his primary opponent, instead focusing on where he stands on the issues with a minimal of extravagant promises.
  
       Sandy Pensler (R)- Has spent much time trashing James as possible. Interestingly, he's supposedly trashed Trump behind closed doors, while (like just about every Republican in this state) trying to align himself as much as possible with the guy in public. Ran a previous congressional bid on a platform that was both pro-choice and advocated for government-run healthcare. You can decide for yourself whether he's had a change of heart on all of that... of course, your not-so-humble correspondent hopes that he hasn't, if he somehow gets elected.
  
       Marcia Squier (G)- Originally planned to run for a House seat in Oakland County, decided to do this instead. Claims Stabenow isn't progressive enough and is too "corporatist."
  
  
• U.S. House. This one feels like a foregone conclusion, but there's quite a few challengers here. Paul Mitchell, of course, bought Candice Miller's former seat in the last election.
  
        Paul Mitchell (R)- Still not the hair care guy. Still, more or less, unresponsive to his constituents back home, especially in Lapeer County, his supposed home these days. Still the first person in line to defend anything the president says or does. Is running unopposed in the primary.
  
       Frank Accavitti, Jr. (D)- From last time: "A former mayor of Eastpointe and state rep in Macomb County. He has made a point of talking about bringing broadband to the Thumb, and that his jobs plan calls for incentivizing companies to run broadband across state right-of-ways. Opposes single-payer healthcare because "what about employees in the insurance industry/stockholders of insurance companies?" Still comes off as lobbyist as all hell, mostly because he was one.
  
       Kimberly Bizon (D)- An environmental activist who decided to run for political office. Supports health care for all, more funding for public schools and teachers, fair policies for family farms, and is solidly in the progressive camp on most issues.
  
       Mike McCarthy (D)- This one is an... interesting case. One of his campaign platforms calls for "required national service for all, rich or poor—with an AmeriCorp/Peace Corps and faith-based missions option as well supported as the Marine Corps." Probably the most anti-war candidate out there; he supports taking funding for military weapons and using it for infrastructure instead.
  
       Jeremy Peruski (I)- Possibly the hardest to pin down of any candidate in this race. As far as we can tell, he's anti-tariff, pro-simplifying the tax code while in support of closing corporate loopholes, opposes Trump's handling of environmental issues and the EPA under Scott Pruitt in general, and has made much of his support for skilled trades and vocational training.
  
       Harley Mikkelson (G)- Green Party, for everything that's worth. Little to no information online.
  
  
• State Senator.
       Gary Glenn (R)- These days, he's been mostly publicizing the fact that his primary opponent is being largely funded by Consumers Energy, who you might say have a bit of an axe to grind with Glenn. Of course, he has the DeVos-backed Michigan Freedom Fund in his pocket. But don't let any of that that distract you from the fact that this guy is a hardcore homophobic bigot. Think Todd Courser without the adultery, but with more attacking newspaper editors for having the audacity to be gay.
  
       Kevin Daley (R)- Don't let the fact that his primary opponent is completely unhinged and homophobic distract you from the fact that Consumers Energy *really* likes them some Daley, and have put some serious money behind him. Of course, having your opponent making statements that vaguely sound like threats against the reps of said energy companies does that.
  
       Cynthia Luczak (D?)- Bay County Clerk. Her website is rather light on all but the most generic of stances, and there's a reason for that: other than perhaps Lapeer County commissioner Cheryl Clark, Luczak is probably the most conservative Democrat running in any race locally. Lines up fairly well with the NRA's stances on firearms, and she's anti-abortion to boot. Makes one wonder why she bothers running as a Democrat.
  
       Joni Batterbee (D)- The most unapologetic progressive candidate in this race. The one Dem in this race who has not shied away from social issues in the slightest, which may not help her cause in such a solidly Republican district, but is still refreshing to see, regardless.
  
       Bill Jordan (D)- A client of Detroit-area political operative Joe DiSano, Jordan is probably the most mainstream Dem in the race. Wants a part-time legislature, wants to take Lansing out of education, supports protecting the Great Lakes (who doesn't?), wants to give high-schoolers more options for vocational training.
      
       Chuck Stadler (D)- Apart from what is possibly the most typo-ridden campaign website ever, there's nothing here that particularly stands out.
      
  
  
• State Representative. Not much to say here, which is not necessarily a bad thing when you compare to the previous holder of the office. No real primary on either side, so here's your two general election candidates:
  
       Gary Howell (R)- The incumbent. I've had a few issues with Howell's votes and stances in the time he's been in office, but by and large, he's done exactly what he's said he would do, and has made an effort to push new transparency laws through the House. Obviously not being primaried, and as he's already won this seat twice handily, there's not much reason to think he faces much of a challenge.
  
       Chris Giles (D)- Part of me half expected ex-Imlay City mayor and two-time runner-up for this seat Margaret DeLuca to go for it again. But as such, political newcomer Giles is the only candidate running. Strongly aligned with the Bizon-Batterbee "progressive" wing of the area party. Hey, when you're already cannon fodder against an incumbent in a solidly red county, why not go for broke?
  
  
• Ballot Proposals. There are renewals up for the senior citizen millage and the Lapeer Community Schools millage, both of which should pass, but the real point of contention here has been a proposed library millage, which would go towards building a new library on the corner of M-21 and Millville. Naturally, with a price tag of $13 million, opposition has emerged, though riddled with false information. "It's too far away; it's not even in city limits!" You mean to say that Rolland-Warner Middle School isn't in city limits, and a location in front of that campus is too far for students at that school, Zemmer, Mott, and the School Formerly Known As Lapeer West? And that extra 1.3 miles, otherwise known as "a three-minute drive, an eight-minute bike ride, or a less than 25-minute walk" is too much to ask anyone east of the library to travel? The only other argument really out up against it is "the one we have is just fine!" But is it? The library has made several arguments that the space isn't large enough to accommodate the parking needed, nor to be able to make technology more readily available for those without, nor to host the programs they want to without paying out to book one act multiple times in succession, nor to add more books without eliminating the ones they already have. And studies have found that libraries return on average $5-10 for every dollar invested, and that millenials are more likely to use public libraries than older generations. As for the current location, that would go back to the city, likely to be used as a new city hall. What do you do with the old one? Personally, I'd like to see them move in some of the dozens of offices taking up storefronts downtown and free up some space for actual retail, because that is what is going to attract people to downtown, but that's just me.

     As always, don't just take my word for it; I've linked campaign websites and FB pages in the name of each candidate here, so you can read up more on them for yourself. Research. Ask questions. Hell, ask questions of the candidates themselves!

     If they can't answer them, then maybe they don't deserve your vote.