Christopher Harris: Keck-Girdler race was a matter of vision vs. vitriol

Nov. 9—The 2022 Somerset mayoral election was one of the strangest campaigns I've seen in my nearly two decades here at the Commonwealth Journal in some ways, but it was also one of the clearest: The difference between a hand that's pointing forward and a fist.

The political rivalry between Alan Keck and Eddie Girdler is starting to feel a bit like the mid-2010s in the NBA, when the Cleveland Cavaliers and the Golden State Warriors played each other in the finals for four straight years, with the Cavs winning only once in that time frame, and it's turning out that Keck is more Steph Curry than LeBron James.

Longtime mayor Girdler dispatched of the fresh-faced newcomer Keck in 2014, but Keck won in his second attempt four years ago, and held onto his seat by a decent margin — nearly 20 percentage points — on Tuesday night.

There was a clear difference in their campaigns. Keck spoke often about his vision for Somerset in 2018, and citizens got a taste of what it looked like over the next four years. Keck's message built on that this time around: Vision, vision, vision. Let's keep it going.

Maybe you like how Keck's vision turned out, maybe you don't. Personally, I think it's grand to see the food truck festivals and the glowing Virginia sign at night. There have clearly been missteps — annexation plans that proved unpopular and a mural in front of the Somerset City Hall-Energy Center-Whatever-It-Is that caused a stir because it allowed one to step on an image of the American flag are two that come to mind — but the point is this: Keck came in trying to get stuff done in Somerset, and for the most part, that's what's happened. Agree with it all or not, stuff has gotten done.

Girdler's campaign this time was ... not one of vision. It was one of criticism. Keck was, metaphorically speaking, standing on a platform and gesturing around and saying, "Hey, look at what we've accomplished!" while Girdler was down in a bunker, popping up occasionally to launch social media bombs at Keck. Eddie's campaign wasn't about, "Here's what I can do," it was about, "Here's what the other guy is doing."

And I don't think most voters want that, at least in their own community, in local races. On the national stage, a more sharp-edged approach might be more relatable, but close to home, we're all just neighbors trying to live next to each other. Our political races should reflect that. Vision beats vitriol.

Some of Girdler's criticisms were on points that could be reasonably argued, like the leachate situation and concerns surrounding the proposed University of Somerset. Personally, neither issue moves the needle much for me, but I understand why it might for others. Less successful was Girdler's Facebook salvo regarding alcohol being sold at the Virginia — this from the guy who pushed the state to give Somerset more liquor licenses.

The yard signs that read "Save Our City" were way, way, way over the top — save it from what? An occasional invasion of food trucks on East Mt. Vernon Street? Am I in danger from the waffle truck or something? — and the fact that I didn't see Eddie at Republican campaign events I covered in a Republican-heavy county (though I did cover one Democrat campaign event — and Eddie did attend it) was just an odd way to go.

It's a non-partisan race, but it's still very, very hard to win in Pulaski County by tying yourself to the Democratic Party, unless you're willing to put affiliation aside to treat the campaign trail as truly neutral. I don't understand not getting out there and putting your face in front of the crowd if you really wanted to win. Keck certainly did that.

Even Girdler's message about homelessness felt more aggressively political than proactive. Other city candidates acknowledged that it's a difficult problem with no clear clear answers; Girdler responded to the CJ's questions for our "Voter's Guide" section by stating that he had a plan, and he'd implement it starting January 1 — assuming he was elected, of course.

It's great to have a potential solution for homelessness in Somerset, but I'm sure those it might benefit would have rather you pitched it to the current administration a long time ago, acting as a citizen with a helpful idea, than waiting to see if you get elected first. I know Girdler was trying to score points with voters by having a plan, but the opportunistic way in which it was presented I know rubbed some the wrong way.

I would have been interested to hear more of Girdler's vision for Somerset, though after having lived in his version of Somerset for 12 years, I suspect I already know what it looks like. That said, maybe he could have gotten inspired by the revitalization we've seen and come up with some new ideas to improve overall quality of life here and attractiveness of community. That would have been very welcome.

Instead, all I heard were criticisms of the other guy, and I'm just not interested in that from my mayor. I want more along the lines of what we've experienced the last few years, whether it comes from Keck, Girdler, or the man on the moon.

Only Keck was interested in talking about more of it, from what I observed. And that, I believe, is why he'll be our mayor again for the next four years. Once again, in community politics, vision beats vitriol.