DuMouchelle and Davis both proclaim
high-road stance after bruising primary
UPDATED Wednesday with comments from Janice DuMouchelle, at bottom.
In the GOP primary battle between the novice and the old hand, it wasn't even close.
Carrying all but one municipality in the 1st Michigan House District, Janice DuMouchelle soundly beat Charles "Terry" Davis III for the chance to face Rep. Tim Bledsoe in the fall. The district encompasses the five Grosse Pointes, Harper Woods and portions of Detroit. In recent decades it has almost always been a Republican seat, and Bledsoe's election during the Democratic landslide of 2008 has observers wondering if he can hold it two years later.
DuMouchelle, whose family name is well-known in the area as owners of the Detroit auction house, has never held elected office and ran as a proponent of a "leaner, greener, growing" Michigan. Davis, a Grosse Pointe Farms city councilman, touted his experience not only in local government, but as a member of the Reagan administration in the 1980s.
But Republicans clearly preferred the newcomer. The only place Davis beat DuMouchelle was in the Farms, and even there it was by a fairly narrow margin of 23 votes.
Bledsoe had an easy time of it, winning handily against weak opposition. Among his first acts after the election was to announce planned legislation to expand access to the Michigan Pesticide Notification Registry, suggesting he is taking DuMouchelle's positioning as an environmentalist seriously.
In most of the Pointes, Republican contests drew the majority of the primary voters. In Grosse Pointe Shores, 77% of all ballots cast were Republican, and in the Farms it was 65%. Democratic races attracted the majority in Grosse Pointe Park (67%) and Harper Woods (62%).
GrossePointeToday.com asked Davis for a statement, and he sent the following:
Candidates looking back on an election that they lost are always tempted to question what they would have done differently. Frankly, I would not have done anything differently! I ran the race I planned. I produced substantive literature telling my positions and my background simply and truthfully, showing it would give me the ability to be effective. I disseminated this to the likely primary voters and knocked on their doors to talk to them. Then, that done, I left it up to each voter to make the comparisons between the candidates and make their choice!
However, what I am most proud of is what I did not do. I did not build fabrications about my work experience and knowledge in my literature to mislead voters ... nor did I stoop to sully my opponent with blatant untruths. The mark of a true politician is a person who uses words falsely, knowing they have a different connotative meaning to a reader and will get the desired reaction. This manipulation of the truth shows much about character and is why politicians are so poorly thought of today. Thankfully, you can always tell a budding politician by their actions and how they campaign.
In this year's primary election almost 1,700 more people voted than voted in the 2008 primary. This was a non-presidential election year so the vote totals were supposed to be lower, not higher. These extra voters were not the typical primary voters, were not identified on primary voter mailing lists nor "walk lists" for door-to-door canvassing. Therefore neither myself nor my opponent mailed our literature to these people or knocked on their doors. Most came solely motivated to vote for the gubernatorial candidate of their choice.
Without literature and with very little published information, how and why they choose the candidates they did lower on the ballot is pure speculation ... but I believe gender and name identification were paramount.
Not always the best method to use on casting a vote.
One last comment .... having never run for partisan office before, I learned the experience is a little like being able to be present at your eulogy. The marvelous experience is seeing the people who help you, show confidence in you and let you know what they really think. That is the reward for the effort; the real work starts after that in having to fulfill all the promises you made. This time I got the reward without the work ... something to be grateful for!
DuMouchelle responded via e-mail with comments on her victory, below:
I am humbled by the support I received in the primary election. To earn the votes of so many thousands fills my heart with a great sense of purpose and responsibility. There’s a tendency on the part of many politicians to view votes cast in their name as votes cast just for themselves. I don’t feel this way. This campaign isn’t about me, or about Tim Bledsoe—it’s about Michigan. I view each vote cast for ‘Janice DuMouchelle’ as a vote cast for a new and better path for our state and our district. While my campaign may have been victorious on election night, I won’t feel we’ve truly ‘won’ anything until the people of my district can find gainful employment, educate their children to their fullest potential, and send a message to Lansing that our government must live within its means.
Primary elections are difficult. You do your best to differentiate yourself from your opposition, but you try to hew within the boundaries of honest differences based on policy and professional background, rather than play petty politics. I believe my candidacy offered voters new ideas, a fresh perspective, and a better chance at winning back our district, or I wouldn’t have run. I think people responded to that. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Mr. Davis and his family and I wish them well in all future endeavors. I’ll say this, had the shoe been on the other foot, I would have supported Terry Davis against Tim Bledsoe to the maximum of my ability.
