Habakkuk 2:1 - I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved.

Alaska Elections House Line Up

Initial reactions to Alaska Elections
US House of Representatives Edition
written by Joshua Coffman

Christopher Cumings (Democrat)

Saw his interview with one of the news networks, and I have to say, his political stance is not bad, but there are several things that I personally respond to in a leader:

1. Conviction, the ability to clearly state when something is right or wrong and not refer to as a feeling. Cumings used a lot of "I feel" statements in his interview.

2. I also respond to professionalism. The Bible states it this way "make friends of the mammon." You don't need to have money to dress in a suit. You don't have to change your convictions to act in a professional way (unless it's your conviction to not be professional, in which case I don't understand why you would run for public office.)

Both of these issues are why I would feel uncomfortable voting for Christopher Cumings for US Representative from Alaska.

Alyse Galvin (Democrat)

According to the Bible it's a judgement on a people group for women or children to be ruling. So in a democratic society, I don't see how I could ever recommend voting for a women to rule over us, but given most people's ambivalence to the idea here are my other first impressions of her.

1. Conviction, Alyse Galvin's promo video on her website is full of conviction. And while I disagree with her ultimately, she definitely gives the impression at least that she has conviction.

2. Professionalism. Again, I see in Alyse a sense of professionalism that a lot of "men" (and other women) lack these days.

Like I said before, I really don't see why Christians or Jews vote for women other than the fact that there are few men of conviction and professionalism willing to run for public office.

Carol Hafner (Democrat)

Website includes LGBT+ branding. Also one of her top priorities is to stop drilling immediately, according to the interview written out on her website.

1. Conviction. She has none. Everything on her website is pandering and none of it comes from conviction. Not to say she isn't passionate, which I'm sure that she is about most things, but not from a place of deep conviction. Rather she uses words like "impact" and "issue."

2. Professionalism. Her promoted tweet on her website was one of her yelling at her opponent. Neither professional, nor did it expose any information, or change the dialogue.

John Nelson (Republican)

Already like the guy and I just started reading about him now. He is both familiar and supportive of KrisAnne Hall. Also he has three children that he is proud of.

1. Conviction. His website clearly states that his first priority is law and order. Also his "Issues" page is succinct and decisive with little verbiage that isn't necessary to the point.

2. Professionalism. He is organized, experienced, and well put together.

Never heard of this man before tonight, but I already feel like I appreciate his energy level. He brings leadership to the table through his urgency, consistency and family stability.

Dimitri Shein (Democrat)

His promo video was compelling but, on closer observation, he is running on political gibberish. He is a kind hearted man that I'm sure would do great politically.

1. Conviction. No conviction. This man's entire platform is built on feelings and political issues. Were he to be elected, our Representative in Congress would fold to the Whip under most circumstances.

2. Professionalism. This gentleman runs a great campaign but other than that I see very few instances of professionalism in his walk, talk or associates.

Jed Whittaker (Republican)

This candidate is not using platforms or traditional campaign tactics to gain notoriety. Rather he is running for office to merely help people.

1. Conviction. Jed has conviction. Just the single article that I read of an interview with him laid out clearly his purpose in running.

2. Professionalism. Jed is not a professional. He is just a helper. His statements definitely resound with a healthy knowledge of the purpose of Congress: to check the executive branch through the use of... legislation.

Don Young (Incumbent)

This gentleman has been elected for years. Since 1973 to be exact. And he's done a decent job for his constituency. Representing the people of Alaska in Congress is a unique boot to fit and so far he's been a decent snapshot of who we are as a state.

1. Conviction. Don Young is well known for his conviction. I've heard him speak in person and there is not doubt that there are issues that are very important to him on a spiritual level, not just a political one.

2. Professionalism. After years in a weak Congress, dealing with an immensely powerful executive branch and a slimy 9th circuit, politics can get tiring. Especially now with Twitter and Youtube and Facebook bringing all the negative parts of the job to a boiling point. I have seen Don Young act unprofessionally but for the grand majority of the time that I've seen him operate on our behalf, I'm not more embarrassed of him than I am of my own behavior. So overall I think he's a pretty professional guy.


This is just my first impressions of these gentlemen and ladies who are running for office to become a representative of us to the United States Congress. Obviously, were I to get to know these men and women better, I could speak more to their character but you can only really get to know so many people. So I hope this short "article" helps in some way pique your interest in Alaska representation.


Popular Posts