Picking between the lesser of two evils: Nevada Senate race and national politics

The Nevada Senate race between Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Tea Party-backed Republican Sharron Angle is a perfect model of races across the country: An extreme right-wing Tea Party candidate versus an lackluster establishment Democrat.

Neither are great choices to most Americans.

Here, IDS columnists make the case for both sides as the lesser of the two evils.

Sharron Angle is the lesser of two evils.

Sharron Angle would do less damage to personal freedom than Harry Reid.

The race to represent Nevada in the U.S. Senate is, like several other such contests, frustrating and fascinating at the same time.

As is the case with many electoral contests across the country, the race pits an insurgent Tea Party-backed candidate running as a Republican against an establishment Democrat who may actually lose to someone who wasn’t even supposed to win the GOP primary.

The Tea Party-backed Republican in this race is former state legislator Sharron Angle, who has had a narrow lead above incumbent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for much of the general election season.

What makes this race a frustrating one to watch is the same thing that has made most political races frustrating for decades: the lack of a candidate who consistently and coherently defends individual freedom on all fronts, not just in the social sphere or the marketplace.

Now, it is important to remember that not all Republicans are dedicated free marketeers who also want to regulate every aspect of our personal lives, just as not all Democrats are committed civil libertarians who want the state to control the economy from top to bottom.

Nevertheless, we can safely say that in both the Nevada Senate race and most other races around the country, voters are faced with one candidate who will do more to fight for economic freedom and less to fight for social freedom and another who will do largely the opposite.

It may be an unpalatable choice to have to make, but at a time when economic freedom is being actively curbed (while social freedoms are merely at a standstill in most cases), the less destructive choice is likely to be the Republican, who will at least help slow the slide toward tighter economic controls.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement, but with choices like these, it’s the most a candidate can ask for.

- Jarrod Lowery

No, Harry Reid is.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid against Tea Party nominee Sharron Angle.

You’d think this could be a shoo-in win for senator.

But because of the toxic political climate this year, polls have shown these candidates within the margin of error.

Both candidates have had their own follies throughout this year.

Harry Reid almost voted against his own health care bill (twice), he was a part of a book scandal in early 2010 and is one of the key players in the GOP’s witch hunt against the Obama administration. 

Sharron Angle, on the other hand, is criticized for personal comments rather than actions in public service.

Among these quotes, Angle has said her job didn’t require a plan to create jobs, the
Federal Department of Education should be eliminated and the press was needed only to throw their agendas out to the public. 

The candidates are in a neck-and-neck race and yet when it comes time to vote for the best leader, Nevada needs to select Reid.

Arguments against Reid are valid. There are times when he is out-of-touch with not just his position as Senate majority leader but also his role as a senator in general.

But to kick him out of his seat for a Sarah Palin wannabe is absurd and (somewhat) horrifying.

A seat in the U.S. Senate is too prestigious a position to let a radical right-wing Tea Party activist have.

To be a senator, you have to incorporate your state’s values into the overall goals for the entire nation’s future.

Angle does not achieve this because her credibility extends only feet away from a church’s door.

She does not represent a majority of her constituents, yet alone Americans.

Harry Reid might have seen his best days go by, but his public service is needed for at least another six years.

- Drew Anderson