A small yet friendly group of constituents showed up at the
The evening was spiced up by those always controversial issues – the war in Iraq (Jacob for, Burridge for new leaders in the White House, both for Veteran’s benefits) and a carefully hidden query about gay rights, which Jacob tried to avoid - and then fell back on the argument that a “certain local church” is against such unions and so are all of the candidates – while Burridge spoke of supporting traditional marriage, but still acknowledged that all types of families deserve the same fairness when it comes to things like health benefits and estate planning.
Both candidates agreed on enforcing immigration laws, raising minimum wages to reflect the standard of living, reversing outrageous government spending trends, and doing away with the No Child Left Behind act.
The similar answers, however, did not have the same effects on the audience.The personal and honest answers Burridge gave, along with his obvious concern for the local people and his promises to fight for the people of Utah and the next generation, brought applause after most of his answers. If Jacob hadn’t been so terribly late, he might have realized that his over-confidence and his snide remarks about the future fate of his opposing candidates fell on an unappreciative audience.A big thumbs-up to his Contract to Utah, though. If he fails to promote the four objectives listed in his letter of intent, he won’t run again. My question, though, is who decides the passing grade?