To The Editor:

Campaigning for election is tough. Elections aren’t a pass/fail test; it’s not enough to be qualified. Voters have to rank candidates and choose who’d be best. So candidates have to make the case, not only for why they’d be good, but for why they’d be better.

And voters have to figure that out amidst campaign noise. 

It’s hard to have neighbors disagreeing about who’s better at something. I’m grateful to everyone who has added respectfully to inherently difficult conversations.

I’ve paid close attention to the conversations and two simple, consistent campaign messages emerge. 

The Democratic candidates, all of whom are knocking on doors to reach voters, make the case that they’ll continue all the good things currently being done throughout our community. In addition, they note a lot of things that could be better, and name ways they’ll improve those things. They welcome input from residents with particular expertise, since the candidates aren’t experts at everything.

The Republican candidates, to the extent they are campaigning at all, make the case that everything is already being well run and no improvement is needed. They’ve pushed back against suggestions for change. They’ve named no issues they have yet to master.

I want representatives who aren’t stumped by the question, “What could you do better?” I support candidates who embrace the things they don’t know, learn from them, and always aim to improve. We shouldn’t have to fight for representatives who are willing to admit they’re wrong sometimes; we all are. A willingness to acknowledge mistakes or lack of knowledge goes a long way toward making room for better decisions, and for improved communication.

So I’ll be voting for the Democrats on Nov. 4.  I don’t just think they’d do a good job. I think they’ve made the case for doing better.

Marin Zielinski

60 1st Street