Voters almost always have the last word

Tuesday’s primary election shook up some things in the 49th state.

While incumbents came out on top in the local primaries and in the governor’s race, Joe Miller’s apparent upset of U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski made news across the country.

In both the Senate and gubernatorial races, we wonder how much of a difference the primary races will make in the end. We’re not entirely sure Tuesday was the last we’ll be seeing of the losing candidates this election season.

It’s not easy to unseat an incumbent, and Miller won’t know if he’s accomplished that until all of the absentee ballots are counted sometime next month. If the absentees don’t change the election night outcome, Miller will have derailed a dynasty.

There was plenty of grumbling back in 2002 when newly elected Gov. Frank Murkowski insisted his daughter was the best candidate to replace him in his congressional seat. But when voters had a chance to oust her in 2004, she defeated challenger Mike Miller in the primary and Democrat Tony Knowles in the general election to keep her seat. It seemed to validate her appointment.

These days, however, incumbent status isn’t necessarily a sure ticket to re-election. The term “bipartisan” seems to have taken on a different slant. Leading up to Tuesday, Miller’s ads pointed to Murkowski votes that sided with the Democrats. Murkowski insisted party politics aren’t important.

Endorsed by the conservative Tea Party and Sarah Palin, Miller’s campaign gained more and more momentum, apparently showing they have more political pull in the Last Frontier than many in either major political party would care to admit. Murkowski says she’s glad she ran a positive campaign. We are, too.

In the gubernatorial race, where Gov. Sean Parnell defeated both his front-running Republican challengers, pundits are waiting to hear if Bill Walker will mount a write-in campaign for governor as an independent. Alaska has a fine history of serious three-way races for governor, with mixed results and a lot of muddy water.

We know that when voters speak at the polls, there’s something to be said for listening to the results. Most of those candidates for whom “no” seemed merely a suggestion do little more than undermine the race for the candidate to whom they lost in the primary. But maybe that’s their purpose.

Would Murkowski run as an independent or Libertarian against Democrat Scott McAdams and Miller, should Miller prevail in the final tally? It’s a question this newspaper isn’t the first to ask. Word is she has plenty of money to mount a general election campaign.

If that’s the case and both Walker and Murkowski decide to continue their push for public office, many will wonder why we had a primary election in the first place. That answer is simple: It’s the most successful process we’ve found to date that allows political parties to choose their official representatives. The petition process also holds an important place, allowing candidates who may not be the most popular among their own parties to still run for office.

Should Walker and/or Murkowski decide to petition, that’s their right. But changing parties simply to be on a ballot hasn’t been a formula for success, and certainly doesn’t reflect the purpose of the primary.