I was satisfied with most of what I saw at the Ted Ferry Center last weekend. Granted, both of the candidates who appeared were similar in regards to most voting issues, but the fact that they both clear ideas on what to do to improve Alaska's economy and position within the federal hierarchy more than makes up for the lack of variety.

In particular, I was taken with Mr. Walker. There wasn't a single question he couldn't answer satisfactorily, and his center-right view of government and private industry struck me as very pragmatic. His ideas about oil reform, industrial regulation, and being assertive with the federal government all rang solid, and he seemed easily aware enough to be trusted with social policy as well as economics.

Samuels was very similar to Walker on most issues, but some of Samuels' positions are a little too extreme for my taste. In particular, I was troubled that Samuels' first answer to solving the budget problems was to cut education in rural areas; I mean, really? Really? That's a shoot-first-ask-questions-never approach to the state's finances if ever there was one. Before doing something that drastic, one would hope the governor would try some methods of BUILDING UP our finances before axing public services. Speaking of axes, my biggest problem with Samuels was that he had one of these to grind. Too much of an idealist, not enough pragmatism. He claimed not to be a straight-up libertarian when I talked to him at the blueberry festival, but after his performance that evening I'm not convinced, and we don't need someone who will put their ideology before their better judgement (coughpalincough).

I'm pretty much in Walker's camp at this point. The only thing that worries me is that he seems to have a rather weak personality and is not terribly charismatic. Even if his policy ideas are all great, we're going to need someone with a backbone to get things done in Washington (or hell, even locally; even smalltime politicians and businessmen in Alaska don't go down without a fight). Samuels was much stronger and more charismatic, even if I'm not as crazy about his approach to the budget (or his unabashed populism; the fliers with him holding up a king salmon on them were just tacky). Really, I wish I could vote for both of them; Walker to do the thinking, Samuels to do the talking. They agree on the vast majority of things, so I'm sure they would work well together. Alas, the gubernatorial position doesn't work that way.

On the other hand, Walker DOES have a history of wrestling the international oil giants. This would imply that he has more metal to him than it appears. Perhaps his legalese can make up for his unassertive demeanor?

So, of the two candidates who spoke at the Civic Center last week, who are you in favor of? Or are you satisfied with the incumbent?