The State Auditor’s race normally is one of those types of races that despite its Apportionment Board importance just struggles to define itself on the issues.  Like alot of down ballot statewide campaigns, the races generally are framed on the candidate’s background and devolves into attacks over their records that rarely have little or anything to do with the office (such as Mary Taylor’s ‘06 attacks against Sykes over the Taft sales tax increase.)

Today, David Pepper’s campaign released his twenty-seven page plan for the office. It is not a fluff piece, nor is it dripping with ideological or partisan devotion.  In fact, I felt it implicitly and frankly acknowledged the good things that Mary Taylor has done in the Auditor’s office and talked about building upon it and improving on it.

The same can’t be said of Pepper’s opponent Delaware Prosecutor David Yost.  Yost is running a more traditionally, but substance-free campaign that focuses more on partisan jabs about campaign donors and ridiculous (false and irrelevant) attacks about taxes.  (Yost even attacked Pepper for not signing a “No Higher Taxes” pledge which is even more politically meaningless in this race as the Auditor has no say on taxes.) 

Yost still boasts the partisan endorsements from his May primary, and has offered no plan for the office, except to say that he, too, favors performance audits (when they might involve a Democratic Administration.)

Couldn’t find a starker contrast: Pepper gives substance about the actual office he’s running for while his opponent makes partisan barbs you’d expect in any race that bare little to no relevance to the actual race itself.  Yost’s campaign is starting to remind me of the ‘06 Barb Sykes campaign while Pepper, I hate to admit it, is reminding me of Mary Taylor’s.  (And I’m not the only one who’s been making that analogy.)

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!