What is the difference between Democrat John Dickert and Democrat Robert Turner?
The most obvious difference is that Dickert is white and Turner black. And based on the election returns from the primary, it sure seems as though Dickert won the white vote while Turner won the black vote.
But besides race, what separates these two in the minds of voters?
I don't know, but I will suggest some possibilities and I hope others will chime in with their ideas.
Turner has held elected office for a long time. This can be an asset or a liability depending on what he did or didn't do in office. My guess is that Turner has done some things for some constituents or he wouldn't keep getting reelected. But who are they and what has he done for them? One vague clue is the rumor that unions will be plowing a sizeable amount of cash into the Turner campaign.
As for John Dickert. First, full diclosure. I have known John since grade school. I like John Dickert personally and so far as I am aware he is a good and decent person. My issues with Dickert are purely ideological, as they would be with Turner. Dickert has embraced just about every big government and big private sector scheme mentioned in Racine over the past few decades. Examples: Imaginarium, KRM, Point Blue, and some may recall the effort to turn the YMCA into a college for animation that would produce 20,000 jobs with a trillion dollar economic impact etc... OK, lets just say that Dickert can get caught up in grandiose schemes to save Racine. On the plus side for me at least, Dickert has had to earn some of his keep in business so he is not reflexively anti-business like so many on the left.
If I could, I would vote for John Dickert. And then I would hope that he would fail to grow the size of government.