ROVE'S DOG ATE HIS RNC EMAILS: THE PROBLEMS OF A SHADOW GOVERNMENT IN THE INFORMATION AGE
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OFRA1O0&show_article=1
I think your view of this one depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Just read it. I can't add anything that makes it any more bizarre than it already is.
Labels: NATIONAL POLITICS
posted by UMRBlog @ 13:58
7 comments
7 Comments:
lINK THE NEW ONE PLEASE
http://quincycitydesk.blogspot.com/
( ALSO GO GET NEW NIKES AND A PURPLE SHEET)
Tony- Please answer why the democrats run candidates who fail to make a compelling argument as to why we should unseat an incumbent? First the girl who ran against Reddington made no case at all, now this Douglas has also made no case for change! What gives?!?
In any election, the burden is on the challenger to differentiate him/herself from the incumbent, especially a short term incumbent.
In Adams County that is especially true for democrats.
Reddington did it in a strange way (Vote for me because I'm not George Schrage, even though George Schrage has nothing to do with this office) but she did it.
McCoy really didn't do it (I'll be tougher on drugs is just too generic and nebulous.)
I honestly haven't followed the Douglas/H'male thing much but it seems to me the challenger should always have had two things in his pocket which made him different from the incumbent. It wouldn't have taken much, but they should have been there. There were plenty out there.
OTOH, until the last four days, John Sullivan didn't do much to differentiate his philosophy from Laura's. There really would have been no bright line if she hadn't misrepresented her campaign committee's activities/receipts/expenditures. I think it was an honest mistake on her part but it created separation where there had been none before.
TYFCB
We have been blessed with John and Paul running a clean as fresh snow race . Two quality guys .
I am 100% committed to Paul , and I hope he wins.
But I would like to see John become active , it is always nice to see a fresh hat in the ring.
UMRBlog has had many emails urging it to comment on this race. I have nothing to say about this race in particular.
I will say this much about what makes a good Alderman. There is a lot of time and talent tied up at those meetings. There are Aldermen who ask useful questions or make constructive points. Then there are Aldermen whose questions just prolong the meeting because the questions are a) to show off that they've read the material and they want to show how prepared they are; or b)asked because they haven't read and understood the material.
Neither trait is conducive to useful meetings.
In fairness, the current city counsel has a very low percentage of both.
I'll comment on the ground game in a minute.
TYFCB
One of the candidates probably has better political skills. One probably is a little more gifted intellectually. Both are earnest.
I don't think personal skills are worth a pitcher of warm spit in this race. The new third ward alderman will be the one who knocked on the most doors in the small windows of time when the weather allowed door-to-door. Unlike '01, there were very few door-to-door days in this cycle. There's surely now more deft way to lose a vote than to ask someone to open the front the door when sleet is flying horizontally.
Question is whether the bad weather favored the incumbent because of better name recognition or whether it retarded the superior ability of the incumbent to do door-to-door (at which he is very good and has his own patented technique).
There's no better man than John Douglas but that's a lot of tough questions that need the "right" answers for him to win.
My last words on the Third Ward Race.
and very good words on such a weird two days .....
Va tech and Quincy
But UMR nice to see some kind fuzzy bunny words in the Local political world .
Was great to be at their forum and see them both smile and like each other , democracy and good neighbors .
Post a Comment
<< Home