In Colorado, the Democrat asserts that he would still vote today for a resolution giving the president authority to act in Iraq - while the Republican is expressing second thoughts about the whole matter. And warns about the danger from North Dakota.
Link
Quote:GOP Hopeful Raises War Doubts
Coors Wonders If Congress Would Still Authorize Iraq Action
By T.R. Reid
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 11, 2004; Page A05
The Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Colorado suggested yesterday that Congress would not have voted to authorize a war in Iraq if the members had known "what we know today." GOP candidate Pete Coors went on to say that, "based on weapons of mass destruction," the United States should be more concerned about Iran and North Korea than Iraq. [..]
"We can say weapons of mass destruction, no weapons of mass destruction," Coors said. "Clearly, we should be more worried today, actually, about Iran and North Dakota than we are -- that is, North Korea -- than we are about Iraq, based on weapons of mass destruction."
Heh...!
I useta live next to North Dakota, never trusted 'em...
News from the SC Senate race:
Quote:S.C. GOP Nominee Regrets Remarks
Gays, Single Moms as Teachers Faulted
By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 18, 2004; Page A06
The Republican nominee in South Carolina's hard-fought U.S. Senate race apologized yesterday for saying gays and unmarried mothers should not teach in public schools, but he stopped short of retracting the statements.
Jim DeMint said he regretted the comments, made in a recent debate, because they distracted voters from "real issues" such as jobs and national security. Repeatedly asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" whether gays and single mothers should qualify as teachers, DeMint said local school boards should decide. [..]
Regarding abortion, DeMint said he would outlaw the procedure under all circumstances, including rape and incest. He declined to say whether the mother, father or doctor should be prosecuted if an abortion is performed. "We'll just have to decide that," he said. [..]
Russert aired a recent debate clip in which DeMint said, "If a person is a practicing homosexual, they should not be teaching in our schools." DeMint later said he felt the same "if a single woman who is pregnant and living with her boyfriend should be hired to teach my third-grade children."
DeMint apologized yesterday for the remarks because they "distracted from the real debate." He repeatedly declined to address the remarks' substance, saying local school boards should decide who teaches.
Link
Did anyone have the chance to see Obama debate Keyes on TV the other day? Apparently, it was quite the event:
Quote:In the Illinois Senate race, Barack Obama leads Alan Keyes by a margin so wide (over 50 points, according to one poll) that a debate between the candidates must--almost as a matter of science--help narrow the campaign. But that would be to underestimate Alan Keyes. As people know, Keyes is candid, eloquent, and intellectually consistent. He argues rather than spins, allowing his logic to take him where it will. He panders to no (earthly) constituency. And he may well have pulled off the impossible last night: lowering his poll numbers even more.
Here's a report on what happened:
Off Keyes
Quote:Obama is an unconventionally gifted politician, but even an incompetent one--let's go farther, actually: even a dolphin or trained seal--could have done better last night than Alan Keyes. All Obama had to do yesterday was play the Earthling card; Keyes took care of the rest. [..]
The more impassioned Keyes got, the easier things became for his opponent. Discussing the role of Christianity in his life, Keyes made an impassioned speech about his "faith-shaped conscience." "Without faith," Keyes declared (well, yelled, really), "there is just a faith-shaped void where the conscience ought to be!" In case anyone was still in doubt as to where his campaign fit into this equation, Keyes addressed the congregation of Illinois: "I challenge all the voters who profess to believe in Christ: How can you vote from such a faith-based void?" To which Obama replied, with a well-executed weariness: "Yeah, I don't need Mr. Keyes lecturing me about Christianity. That's why I have a pastor, that's why I have my Bible, that's why I have my own prayer. ... I'm not running to be the minister of Illinois. I'm running to be its United States senator." Keyes looked momentarily non-plussed by the reasonableness of this reply. [..]
Before the debate was over, viewers had heard the following snippets and phrases from one of the two candidates: "the persecution of our Christian citizens," "social self-destruction," "the use of the body in this way is ... an abomination," "no one has the information necessary to avoid incest," and "gun-control mentality is ruth-less-ly absurd." Guess which one.
(I'm not cherrypicking the items I post for these threads, I swear - I've posted everything I came across that seemed interesting. I'm not going out of my way to make the Republican candidates look either vile or just silly - Coburn, DeMint and Keyes do
that all by themselves.)
I wish I'd seen that! I really, really like Obama, but haven't seen much of him since I left Illinois.
Did that guy really win the republican primaries?
Not exactly, Jack Ryan did but got in trouble (of all things to get in trouble for it was something silly, having to do with his divorce and how he treated his wife) and so the Illinois Republicans went looking for someone they thought stood a chance against Obama (and who would actually accept the challenge) and came up with Keyes. He's ya know, black. -sighs-
sozobe wrote:Not exactly, Jack Ryan did but got in trouble (of all things to get in trouble for it was something silly, having to do with his divorce and how he treated his wife)
And sex - dont forget it was about sex. You cant get thrown out of the primaries like that if its not about sex ;-)
Rasmussen has updates on the Senate races - good news for the GOP. Coburn is now ahead by 5% in OK, and Burr leads Democrat Bowles by 4% in NC, while Betty Castor's lead in FL has narrowed down to 1%:
Senate overview
The congressional campaigns are just now hitting the airwaves in the Chicago area with commercials. The hottest race is in the Illinois 8th congressional district, which pits GOP ur-incumbent Phil Crane (first elected in 1968 -- the longest-serving Republican in congress) against challenger Melissa Bean. Crane had a well-publicized bout with alcoholism a few years ago, and has been accused of spending too little time in his own district and too much time on taxpayer-funded trips around the world. The Chicago Tribune, not noted as a liberal publication, actually endorsed Bean, stating:
Republican leaders privately acknowledge that Crane has gotten lazy and is out of touch with his constituents. The leaders have not been successful at shaking him out of his lethargy. It's time for a change.
Both the GOP and the DNC have pumped money into this campaign, and the attack ads that started airing this week are getting pretty brutal.
Frankly, I think Crane will eke out a victory, but with Kerry leading by a wide margin in the state and no one to vote for in the senate race, many predict that a lot of GOP voters will stay home on Nov. 2. If that's the case, then this congressional race will be an interesting one to watch.
sozobe wrote:I just read that Russ Feingold -- probably my favorite active policitician -- is facing a serious challenge for the senate in WI.
You're right Soz... Tim Michaels is runnig against Feingold and the two campaigns are getting really good. Feingold is so much more experienced then Michaels though and I think that really showed through in the debate the other night.
The commercial campaign is getting really heated. Great ads on both sides. You can check out some of them
here.
I really like the "Level playing field" ad.
Did you know that Feingold was 1 of only 2 votes to vote against automatic pay raises for members of congress? He puts his money where his mouth is too by sending his yearly raise back to the treasury department.
Michaels is a pretty savvy business man that is doing a good job appealing to hard core conservatives. He does his homework and is pretty well informed about the issues.
His commercials can be seen
here. I liked the "Taxes" ad.
It is turning into a very interesting race.
Great site alert
Dales linked in another blogger's site about the senate races. It's great. Like Dales does for the state polls on the presidential elections, this guy gives daily updates and state-by-state overviews of the polls re: the senate races. Like Dales, he provides a little explanation about how one poll relates to another and why he chooses to keep or move the designation for the race on the basis of it. Like Dales, the guy is a Republican. But unlike with Dales, whose "Daly Thoughts" blog veers off into the fiercely partisan as soon as the topic is something other than polls, it takes you some time reading this blog to realise that he is indeed one. Plus, he's got a subtle sense of humour. Click to:
Senate Analysis 2004
Cool.
Thanks for the Russ commercials, JP. Level playing field was good, for sure. How old would McCain be in 2012? Too old to be VP, right? ;-)
Interesting, jpinMilwaukee. Looked at a few Feingold ads and two of his opponent's.
I gotta say - I agree with Feingold's, obviously ... but boy, they're kinda boring, aren't they? Even "Level playing field", though clever, isn't exactly attention-grabbing; the others I saw were plain unremarkable.
I looked at two of the Michaels ads on taxes, they packed a lot more punch. (Though man, do they take a long time to load.)
One was yer regular "he voted for taxes 200 times" nonsense, but - grabs your attention, high-speed thing, with an intro joke - and the other one was really quite clever. And again - sure grabs your attention.
If Feingold makes it (I should bloody well hope so) - please let him get another PR company next time, 'K?
From a designers stand point I actually liked his ads. I have the advantage of seeing them in context of the Michael's ads though. They have both done a good job of actually addressing the points the other one makes.
For example Michaels first came out with the ad about Feingold voting 200 times for taxes. Then Feingold came out with his ad saying he actually voted for over 1 trillion dollars in tax cuts. He then says he voted against the other ones because they were irresponsible and would only add to the deficit. He then puts out an ad saying that Michaels wouldn't sign a fair campaign agreement and Michaels responds saying a fair campaign agreement is only a gimmick and that Feingold just doesn't want him to point out negative things that would hurt his campaign.
Or maybe I'm just a sucker for cleverness;)
Reviving this thread for early news on the 2006 races ... for example:
Quote: FBI Whistle-Blower to Run for Congress
By FREDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer
Tue Jun 28,10:20 PM ET
Former FBI whistle-blower Coleen Rowley will run for Congress as a Democrat in Minnesota's 2nd Congressional District, where she hopes to knock off GOP Rep. John Kline.
"I'm concerned about the direction of the country," Rowley said in a telephone interview Tuesday. "We have done things that have made us less safe, among them the Iraq invasion and the loss of our allies and the moral high ground in international affairs."
Rowley, 50, was named one of Time magazine's Persons of the Year for 2002 after writing a critical memo on FBI intelligence failures.
She had sought a seat this year on the new Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, designed to ensure that government actions in the war on terror do not infringe on people's rights. But when President Bush appointed members of the board earlier this month, Rowley's name was not on the list. She said that was a factor in deciding to run for Congress.
Rowley will face an uphill campaign in a conservative district that Kline won by 16 percentage points last year. Also, Kline's opponent in that race, Teresa Daly, might run again. Daly did not return phone messages Tuesday, but her 2004 campaign manager, Darin Broton, said, "If I was betting, I'd say she will run."
Rowley said the district's conservatism would play to some of her strengths.
"I'm also quite conservative in many respects," she said. "I'm fiscally conservative, and conservative on law-enforcement-type issues."
Rowley, who retired from the FBI last year, said Kline has voted too much in lockstep with the Bush administration. "A congressman should be independent-minded," she said.
Kline spokeswoman Angelyn Shapiro declined to comment on Rowley, saying the congressman was focused on his work.
I totally forgot to post a link here to my June thread
Ranking US Senators - specifically, those up for reelection. Since I just put a new post up there, I guess I can make up for that now.
yippee, nimh, for getting this topic up and running again. The mid-term elections are 14 months away but campaigning in earnest will begin (if it hasn't already) right after the first of the year. It should be pretty wild and I look forward to your wit and wisdom.
This is realjohnboy reporting from the state of VIRGINIA. (johnboy admits to being a very liberal Democrat, but I try to report the news to a thread such as this one as evenhandedly as I can).
The junior Senator from Virginia is George Allen (Republican). He is up for re-election in 2006 and some fancy him as a possible presidential candidate in 2008. He ranks #60 on nimh's "approval list." He is a strong supporter of everything that Mr Bush believes in and, therefore, his future is closely linked to the fortunes of the President.
The senior Senator is John Warner (Republican) and one of the most powerful members. He is a former Secretary of the Navy (a big industry in Virginia). He is well regarded by folks in both parties as being a very decent man who has brought home the bacon while also being very thoughtful about national and international issues, He is not up for re-election this time but he is in his seventies. No one will challenge his seat as long as he wants it.
Virginia has, in the last 20 years or so, tilted towards the Republicans in national races. The military and the rural folks were comfortable with the message they heard from the Republicans and were turned off by the rhetoric from the Democrats.
But the odd thing about Virginia has been the success of the Democrats in local and state elections. They are holding their own. Virginia is one of (I believe) only two states where the Governor can serve only one, two-year term. No chance for re-election. So we tend to flip from a Dem and then to a Repub and then back. The real power lies with the legislature.
So we had the first black Governor in the south (Doug Wilder, who went on to become mayor of Richmond) and our current Gov is Mark Warner (Dem), no relation to our senior senator. He has been a loyal foot-soldier in trying to revive the national Dem party and he, too, has his eye on running for President in 2008. His term ends in January.
The demographics of Virginia are changing rapidly, and so also the political composition. Northern Virginia (the suburbs of DC) are filling up with yuppies. Richmond, with a large black population, is on an economic rebound. My own voting district, Agnor-Hurt, used to be over-whelmingly Republican, and johnboy would watch the results come in: 209-10 in one. But in 2004 we went for Kerry. That is how dramatic and dynamic Virginia is.
Anyway, nimh, I suggest that this race in Virginia be one of those you watch. Some folks are suggesting that Mark Warner go up against Mr Allen for the Senate seat and forget about 2008.
---realjohboy reporting from Virginia---
