Opinion: Patty Kubeja May Be Hurting Her Chances Of Winning By Snubbing Debates
In the last two weeks, Kane County has had three events where all Kane County Commission Candidates were invited, none of which Republican Nominee Patty Kubeja attended; it has not gone unnoticed.
As the title of this piece reads, this is just my opinion. And you know what they say opinions are like. That said, and as I’ve mentioned before, I am an observer of politics, both local and national…well, maybe more than just an observer; an aficionado may be more accurate. And I feel like I’m reading the tea leaves right on this…
At the candidate debate held at Kanab Center on October 18 and hosted by Kane County Employee Association, her absence was punctuated by a statement read by the M.C., which had been posted on Kubeja’s official Facebook page just an hour before the debate; it reads:
“The time for debate ended in June when I beat my opponent Andy Gant handily in the GOP Primary. Now, through a loophole in Utah’s “Sore Loser Law,” Gant has filed to run a desperate write-in campaign against me for a second bite at the apple.
Meanwhile, I am running unopposed on the ballot and preparing to take a seat on the Kane Commission on Jan. 3rd, 2023. I will hit the ground running on Day 1 to fight for the Citizens of Kane County against Federal overreach on our thousands of miles of public lands, ensure fire protection for every resident in the county, and provide oversight against backroom deals for big developers and out of state investors who only want to make a quick buck on the backs of our taxpayers.”
The text was posted with an image of a section of the General Election Ballot showing just her name on the ballot and the results of the June Primary Election showing Kubeja with the highest vote total, 104 more votes than her opponent, current Commissioner, and now write-in candidate Andy Gant.
The M.C. noted that she had responded that she had received the rules for the debate but otherwise did not confirm and did not send a statement directly.
When I’d heard that she had skipped the first debate (which I missed), I wondered aloud if that was intentional and asked someone I know associated with her campaign if there was a reason. That person stated that she had told them she was boycotting it in solidarity with the ATV club, which was no longer being allowed to have its meetings in the County building they’d used for years. I actually thought that was a reasonable excuse…if that was true. Again, I did not hear that from Patty; it was secondhand, so hard for me to know its validity. Then I heard that she’d missed the event held at Best Friends last week and just sent a statement. Then last night, she quite clearly had decided not to attend the third event, based on her post.
But here’s the thing. Her post is wrong. The time for debate continues, until the General Election, because that’s when the people decide who they want to elect. All the people, not just the Republicans. Even if, in past local elections, it’s basically been a foregone conclusion when a candidate wins the GOP nomination, that’s still not actually being elected. And not just in the eyes of the people but in the eyes of the law. Anything can happen between a primary and the General Election; in this case, someone legally opted to run as a write-in. I would argue that 104 votes (or about 5%) are not really beating someone “handily,” but I think that’s open to interpretation.
What’s not open to interpretation is Kubeja calling part of our election process a loophole. Any citizen’s right to run for office, whether through the traditional process of nomination through a party (or not) or as a write-in candidate, all those paths are equally legitimate under the law, and I worry about someone who would speak that way of Utah’s election laws.
And while it may be true she’s the only one on the ballot for Commission Seat A; she’s certainly not running unopposed. And for however well I felt she campaigned during the primary season, I see these current actions as missteps in her campaign.
A good leader must be able to answer tough questions from her constituents. To announce that “the time for debate ended in June” but then be putting on her own Town Hall Forum later this week seems like contradictory messages. Which is it?
And while I don’t think the results of the Straw Poll held at the end of the KCEA debate are at all accurate (Gant with 69 and Kubeja with just 17), and simply reflect the votes of the under 100 people in attendance, I do feel Kubeja’s absence at the debate impacted those voters in the room. How will her choices to skip the debates impact the final vote total? Only time will tell!
Editors Note: Pat Horning was also absent but notified the committee that he was attending to a family matter. Pat was present at the other two debates.
Viewpoints and perspectives expressed throughout The Independent are those of the individual contributors. They do not necessarily reflect those held by the staff of The Independent or our advertising sponsors. Your comments, rebuttals, and contributions are welcome in accordance with our Terms of Service. Please be respectful and abide by our Community Rules. If you have privacy concerns you can view our Privacy Policy here. Thank you!
Click here to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or a Letter to the Editor
I didn’t see this until after the election. Most of the events were pushed by write-in candidates. It seemed odd to me that duly elected officials would need to engage in a process they already engaged in. And, I guess it may have hurt Patty in some respects, but she won. Do you have any thoughts about that?