As This Fine Newspaper paper is being printed -- that's a frightening 6,000 copies of my face, folks -- people are heading to the locations all across the country to do their civic duty: to put up with harassment from exit pollsters and annoying reporters who are hanging around the polling places.
Oh, and the people are voting, too, assuming they're not scared off by the pollsters. And thank goodness Election Day is here -- it means all these unsightly candidates' signs will be soon going away.
I have noticed a very alarming trend on these signs and other campaign advertisements this year: terrible portraits of candidates. There are some really horrible mug shots of potential elected officials out there. (Now, let me say that I fully recognize that I have no right to criticize mug shots, seeing as I have incredibly dorky portraits of me running in not one, but TWO area newspapers. But then again, I am not running for public office; I am a poor journalist who, logically, would have horrid mug shots).
I am not sure what message some of these candidates are trying to send with these portraits, but something tells me the message actually being sent is very different.
Take the picture that Glade Hall has on his campaign signs as an example. Now, I admire Glade, and just between you and me, he's getting my vote. This is despite the fact that, in his photo, he looks lost, bewildered and just a tad frightened. And when you're talking about the Reno City Council, most of the members aren't frightened. Yes, they are lost occasionally, and bewildered almost always, but never frightened.
Another strange mug-shot choice goes to Vivian Freeman. Again, I admire her very much and think she's a good person, but in her picture, she looks like she is in serious pain. Yeah, she's smiling, but it's a smile someone would have if he or she had just sat down on a tack -- just as the picture was being taken. Why did Vivian Freeman use this picture? Are legislators supposed to be in pain? Am I missing something?
These are just two of the picture choices I found to be odd. In Dawn Gibbons' ads, the look on her face sends the message, "Come on, get real!" She has this toothy smirk that you'd expect someone to have after informing them were being stalked by a vicious, giant rutabaga. Jenny Hubach sports a smile that looks about as forced as the smiles of people being held hostage. Jessica Sferrazza-Hogan's picture, with her hair draped across her shoulder and her head tilted slightly, looks a little like she's trying to flirt. And forgive me, but any picture of Tom Herndon is just goofy. (That's something Tom and I have in common.)
This whole candidate-picture thing is the only redeeming quality I can find in our U.S. Senate race. I disagree with John Ensign on many issues, and it's disturbing that one of Nevada's two senators will be among the most conservative. But, hey, when it comes to looks, Nevada will be well-represented, that is if you don't count Harry Reid.
Let's face it: John Ensign is gorgeous. A potential Backstreet Boy. He's a total hottie. (And I say this in a manly, non-sexual manner that should in no way upset Ira Hansen.) Has John Ensign ever taken a bad picture? I doubt it. Contrast this to his opponent, Ed Bernstein, who, well, is closer to Harry Reid on the looks scale. I think that if Bernstein looks more like Russell Crowe, and Ensign looks more like Ernest Borgnine, it's a completely different race.
But I digress. Soon, all of the campaign signs will go away, and this will be a moot point -- for a few months, until the campaign signs for next year's Sparks city elections are erected.
And looking at the current Sparks City Council ... something tells me the mug shots for the next election won't be that aesthetically pleasing, either.
Jimmy Boegle is a fifth-generation Nevadan who promises to one day have a more aesthetically pleasing mug shot on this page. Jimmy's column appears here Tuesdays, and he can be reached via e-mail at jiboegle@stanfordalumni.org.