"The best way for a Democrat to get elected in Pennsylvania is to pretend he's pro-life and pro-gun -- and never explain why he's in a Party that's neither."
It also helps for the elected Democrats to ignore -- as best they can -- that the state massivley favored Hillary Clinton in the primaries. Right now, Democratic politicians in this state are twisting themselves into cortortions to back Obama, a candidate whose views are totally at variance with most Pennsylvanians. It's quite a spectacle.
BREAKING NEWS? AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE IS WHAT MIGHT (KEY WORD) BE VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT BARACK OBAMA'S BIRTH RECORDS.
Some of Pennsylvania's most prominent Hillary haters -- including Bob Casey, Jr., Rep. Patrick Murphy, and Rep. Jason Altmire -- are backing Obama. So too is Cong. Tim Holden, who alternately claims to be undecided or undeclared. Actually, he's just unaware. I write about such people today (Friday) on my Pennsylvania blog, and I urge you to visit. Pennsylvania went massively in the Primary for Hillary Clinton.
So why are some PA elected officials drooling over Obama? Answer: Because they obviously believe the voters in the Keystone State are a bunch of nitwits.
Why on earth should Pennsylvania politics matter to you? Because most observers believe that if John McCain wins the state, he will be President-elect. And because many Republican challengers of Democrat incumbents (including Murphy, Altmire, and Holden) conceivably could win their races.
Those challengers are outstanding human being who deserve your support. Please visit their web sites: Tom Manion, Melissa Hart, and Toni Gilhooley. If you make even a small contribution (say, $10 or $15), you will have struck a real blow for political integrity.
It's true that "freedom isn't free," but if we lose it, we have lost everything.
Cindy Reidhead of http://thepinkflamingo.blogharbor.com has been searching Hawaii records to determine that Barack Obama was in fact born in the U.S. (Hawaii). Here's the bulletin Cindy sent out Friday afternoon. (She's located in Hobbs, NM and was a protege of Republican political genius Lee Atwater.)
"It is entirely possible I have found something rather interesting. I chucked out money to locate Barack Obama's birth certificate in Hawaii. From what I found, there is no such record. It is entirely possible that I am completely wrong, and probably am - but here is what I found. Knowing the secrecy of Hawaiian records, I probably am wrong,. But - it's a for what it is worth. it is possible . . . "
Here is the URL"
Showing posts with label Toni Gilhooley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Toni Gilhooley. Show all posts
Friday, June 13, 2008
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Can GOP Challengers Beat Incumbents?
In congressional politics, it's an unwritten rule: incumbents get re-elected and challengers lose. In Pennsylvania this year some truly oustanding candidates are swimming against that tide -- and look like they just might "make it to shore" (i.e., win). Although I usually save my Pennsylvania-specific columns for that site, I'm reprinting this column here because it bears on races across the nation.
How Does a Challenger Beat a Strong Incumbent?
Toni Gilhooley, Republican candidate for Congress in PA’s 17th Congressional District (Harrisburg and East), served as a member of the PA State Police for 25 years. Her husband, William, served in the same organization as a homicide investigator. When talking about investigations, William says they are exercises in “expanding the circle.”
What he means by that is that his work began with a small circle – consisting of things like a crime scene, some relevant clues, perhaps a few witnesses, and perhaps a suspect (or “person of interest”) or two. Solving the crime meant building on the small circle, seeking out more details and people to bring the case to a good conclusion. In another words, it was necessary investigators to build bigger circles in order to solve the crime in a way that would result in a successful prosecution.
Politics functions in much the same way. A candidate starts out with a handful of staff members, a relatively modest group of strong supporters, as well as a small list of donors. In fact, many potential donors are afraid to contribute, because they fear the wrath of the incumbent. Other people who hesitate to donate would rather not back someone they perceive as a loser.
If an incumbent is to win, he or she must expand the circle. They must get more people to support them – and that, by itself, should lead to an increased number of contributions. Get a bandwagon-effect going, and you’ll be surprised by how many people start jumping aboard. Become everybody’s “favorite underdog” and you’ll soon start looking like the “overdog.”
As a candidate, you need to get supporters to reach out to friends, neighbors, and family members . . . and turn them into new supporters. The way to get support is to ask for it – or, perhaps, to get someone else to ask for it. Get one supporter to attract 10 others – and then ask the ten “newbies” to do the same.
Tell them how to do it (face-to-face, phone, or e-mail) and ask everyone who gets involved to “expand the circle.” Thus, ask people for support – and get them to do the same.
Tell supporters exactly what kind of behavior – by them and others – is necessary for you to win. Explain also how you do need contributions – small, medium, or large – to get your message out. Point out to people of modest means that modest contributions are welcome – and extremely helpful.
Everyone has an e-mail list. I have one with 500-plus activists nationwide, and it grows every bay. If people have a list with 10-20-30 or more people on it, send out e-mails that say, for example, “I met Toni Gilhooley, candidate for the 17th district seat in Congress. She spent 25 years working for the PA State Police, and her husband did the same.
“Toni’s a terrific candidate who’s really in touch with the views and needs of people in our area. I’d like to urge you to look into Toni’s candidacy and support her in any way you can. You can find out about her campaign at: http://gilhooleyforcongress.com. Thanks for any help you can give Toni. I hope you’ll let your friends and family members know about her candidacy.”
Ideally, about 25,000 such e-mails and/or phone calls (and maybe more) would go out. Perhaps 8,000 of the people contacted would go to Toni’s web site, and roughly 400-600 would make donations. (There should be a bang-up video appeal for funds on the web site.)
Ask for votes. Ask for support (and give some specifics about what “support” means). And ask for money. And keep mentioning your web site.
If you as a candidate keep extending your “circles,” at some point a large segment of people in your district will vote for you on Election Day. But the key is explaining to audiences, large and small, exactly how they can help you to win your uphill battle against the incumbent.
On Monday, I’m going to use a football analogy – you can’t go wrong with football stories in Pennsylvania – to show exactly how a big underdog won a very important game. The team did so by figuring out exactly what they had to accomplish to win – and then went ahead and did it.
Right now, I’m one of the few people that believes Melissa Hart. (4th CD), Toni Gilhooley (17th CD), and Marina Kats (13th CD), and a few others (like Tom Manion, 8th CC) can win. They’re running against heavily financed incumbents who will do anything necessary to prevail.
I believe Melissa, Toni, Marina, and Tom can win – if they do everything right. Most importantly, they have to keep expanding those circles.
http://gilhooleyforcongress.com
http://peoplewithhart.com
http://katsforcongress.com
http://votemanion.com.
http://livingstonforcongress.com
http://craigwilliamsforcongress.com
Here's the key: The people who volunteer to help -- and actually do so, by putting up yard signs or going door-to-door -- are the most likely to recruit others who will help. The people who donate are most likely to know others who will do the same. Strength builds on strength. If someone contributes $200 or more, ask them if they'd like to serve on the Finance Committee. If someone contributes $2300, make them one of the co-chairs of the Finance Committee. Have frequent meetings with the entire Committee. Every dollars you spend should be getting you votes.
How Does a Challenger Beat a Strong Incumbent?
Toni Gilhooley, Republican candidate for Congress in PA’s 17th Congressional District (Harrisburg and East), served as a member of the PA State Police for 25 years. Her husband, William, served in the same organization as a homicide investigator. When talking about investigations, William says they are exercises in “expanding the circle.”
What he means by that is that his work began with a small circle – consisting of things like a crime scene, some relevant clues, perhaps a few witnesses, and perhaps a suspect (or “person of interest”) or two. Solving the crime meant building on the small circle, seeking out more details and people to bring the case to a good conclusion. In another words, it was necessary investigators to build bigger circles in order to solve the crime in a way that would result in a successful prosecution.
Politics functions in much the same way. A candidate starts out with a handful of staff members, a relatively modest group of strong supporters, as well as a small list of donors. In fact, many potential donors are afraid to contribute, because they fear the wrath of the incumbent. Other people who hesitate to donate would rather not back someone they perceive as a loser.
If an incumbent is to win, he or she must expand the circle. They must get more people to support them – and that, by itself, should lead to an increased number of contributions. Get a bandwagon-effect going, and you’ll be surprised by how many people start jumping aboard. Become everybody’s “favorite underdog” and you’ll soon start looking like the “overdog.”
As a candidate, you need to get supporters to reach out to friends, neighbors, and family members . . . and turn them into new supporters. The way to get support is to ask for it – or, perhaps, to get someone else to ask for it. Get one supporter to attract 10 others – and then ask the ten “newbies” to do the same.
Tell them how to do it (face-to-face, phone, or e-mail) and ask everyone who gets involved to “expand the circle.” Thus, ask people for support – and get them to do the same.
Tell supporters exactly what kind of behavior – by them and others – is necessary for you to win. Explain also how you do need contributions – small, medium, or large – to get your message out. Point out to people of modest means that modest contributions are welcome – and extremely helpful.
Everyone has an e-mail list. I have one with 500-plus activists nationwide, and it grows every bay. If people have a list with 10-20-30 or more people on it, send out e-mails that say, for example, “I met Toni Gilhooley, candidate for the 17th district seat in Congress. She spent 25 years working for the PA State Police, and her husband did the same.
“Toni’s a terrific candidate who’s really in touch with the views and needs of people in our area. I’d like to urge you to look into Toni’s candidacy and support her in any way you can. You can find out about her campaign at: http://gilhooleyforcongress.com. Thanks for any help you can give Toni. I hope you’ll let your friends and family members know about her candidacy.”
Ideally, about 25,000 such e-mails and/or phone calls (and maybe more) would go out. Perhaps 8,000 of the people contacted would go to Toni’s web site, and roughly 400-600 would make donations. (There should be a bang-up video appeal for funds on the web site.)
Ask for votes. Ask for support (and give some specifics about what “support” means). And ask for money. And keep mentioning your web site.
If you as a candidate keep extending your “circles,” at some point a large segment of people in your district will vote for you on Election Day. But the key is explaining to audiences, large and small, exactly how they can help you to win your uphill battle against the incumbent.
On Monday, I’m going to use a football analogy – you can’t go wrong with football stories in Pennsylvania – to show exactly how a big underdog won a very important game. The team did so by figuring out exactly what they had to accomplish to win – and then went ahead and did it.
Right now, I’m one of the few people that believes Melissa Hart. (4th CD), Toni Gilhooley (17th CD), and Marina Kats (13th CD), and a few others (like Tom Manion, 8th CC) can win. They’re running against heavily financed incumbents who will do anything necessary to prevail.
I believe Melissa, Toni, Marina, and Tom can win – if they do everything right. Most importantly, they have to keep expanding those circles.
http://gilhooleyforcongress.com
http://peoplewithhart.com
http://katsforcongress.com
http://votemanion.com.
http://livingstonforcongress.com
http://craigwilliamsforcongress.com
Here's the key: The people who volunteer to help -- and actually do so, by putting up yard signs or going door-to-door -- are the most likely to recruit others who will help. The people who donate are most likely to know others who will do the same. Strength builds on strength. If someone contributes $200 or more, ask them if they'd like to serve on the Finance Committee. If someone contributes $2300, make them one of the co-chairs of the Finance Committee. Have frequent meetings with the entire Committee. Every dollars you spend should be getting you votes.
Monday, May 12, 2008
WILL HILLARY ENDORSE JOHN MCCAIN?
Note: On my Pennsylvania blog today, I have a piece about "America's Worst Congressman: Chaka Fattah." Rep. Fattah is from Philadelphia, and he's about as corrupt as it gets in American politics, which is saying a lot. On my Hillary Supporters for McCain blog, I continue my discussion about how McCain could break the election wide open -- and also add some thoughts about the West Virginia primary. In many ways, WV is "Pennsylvania South," loaded with good people of modest means. Hillary will win big there. Obama basically has no interest in states like WV.
See below: "I wouldn't mind one bit if John McCain says -- in strong terms -- that the Democratic nomination was stolen from Mrs. Clinton. The thieves were Howard Dean and Barack Obama. The crime scenes were Michigan and Florida, whose delegates were denied Clinton."
The following two paragraphs are from my new -- and popular (to my amazement) -- blog called "Hillary Supporters for McCain." From all appearances, Mrs. Clinton will not win the Democratic nomination for President, but she will continue to play a major role in determining who wins the general election. (I hope you take a look at the "Hillary" site. It is definitely not part of the usual "Hillary bashing.")
I'm hoping this blog (the "Hillary" site) becomes one of the most fascinating -- and useful -- ones in the political blogosphere. You can help me achieve that end by taking various steps: (1) bookmarking the site; (2) visiting regularly; (3) sharing your own thoughts about the various articles (either through the "comments" or by writing me at TalkTop65@aol.com); and (4) telling your friends and political allies about this site and providing them links to it. Thanks for your support.
On my Pennsylvania blog, I have a piece about two congressional candidates (Melissa Hart and Toni Gilhooley) whom I'm urging to link themselves closely to John McCain's presidential bid. It's a strategy I believe is applicable to most Republican congressional candidates across the nation. If you agree, please forward it to your own favorite congressional candidate.
One key question that hasn't been answered yet is whether Hillary supporters should back John McCain -- and if so, why? I'd love to hear your thoughts on that issue. Another critical matter is how (and to what degree) Hillary should endorse Obama. If she believes he would be a bad President, should she endorse him at all -- or perhaps rest her wounded spirit incommunicado in Hawaii? If she has to choose between Party and country, won't she choose country?
If I had any direct contact with Senator Clinton, these are some of the questions I'd ask her -- respectfully but forcefully.
Some months ago Mrs. Clinton said the following: "I have a lifetime of experience. Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience. Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002 [against the Iraq War]." In those comments, she was suggesting that McCain has the necessary experience to be President -- and that Obama doesn't.
Many people in Sen. Clinton's Party will tell her, "Hillary, it's time to 'take one for the team' and to strongly support Obama for the presidency. If she gives into that request/demand, it would be a terrible way to conduct a life. This nation -- her nation, mine, and yours -- does face the huge challenges she's discussed in the campaign.
From his record, John McCain has the experience -- and the character -- to deal with them. From his record (or the lack thereof), Obama does not. He demonstrates great naivete about the way the world operates. He would have great trouble protecting America because he doesn't grasp fully that the nation needs protection.
As I've indicated, Obama apparently does not respect McCain the person. Why? Because Obama doesn't know many (any?) people like the Arizona Senator. Instead, he knows his wife (who calls America "a mean place"), or Rev. Jeremiah Wright (who damns the country and blames it for "inventing" the AIDS virus), or William Ayers (who thinks the country deserves to have bombs set off in public places), or Tony Rezko (who believes that political payoffs are appropriate).
This is the Obama who calls his grandmother "a typical white person." The Obama who thinks typical white people are religious fanatics, gun-lovers, racists, and xenophobes.
Am I underestimating Obama? I wish there were some evidence that I was.
And back to Mrs. Clinton: instead of "taking one for the team," she should consider what she owes to a country that has been so good to her, her husband, and her daughter.
I wouldn't mind one bit if John McCain says -- in strong terms -- that the Democratic nomination was stolen from Mrs. Clinton. The thieves were Howard Dean and Barack Obama. The crime scenes were Michigan and Florida, who delegates were denied Clinton.
It's probably unlikely that Senator Clinton will endorse John McCain. Unlikely? Yes. Unimaginable? Not really. Doing the right thing sometimes comes with a personal cost. Doing the wrong thing, however, can come with a terrible cost for a nation.
Life is tough -- and so, I believe, is Hillary Clinton. We shall see, won't we?
See below: "I wouldn't mind one bit if John McCain says -- in strong terms -- that the Democratic nomination was stolen from Mrs. Clinton. The thieves were Howard Dean and Barack Obama. The crime scenes were Michigan and Florida, whose delegates were denied Clinton."
The following two paragraphs are from my new -- and popular (to my amazement) -- blog called "Hillary Supporters for McCain." From all appearances, Mrs. Clinton will not win the Democratic nomination for President, but she will continue to play a major role in determining who wins the general election. (I hope you take a look at the "Hillary" site. It is definitely not part of the usual "Hillary bashing.")
I'm hoping this blog (the "Hillary" site) becomes one of the most fascinating -- and useful -- ones in the political blogosphere. You can help me achieve that end by taking various steps: (1) bookmarking the site; (2) visiting regularly; (3) sharing your own thoughts about the various articles (either through the "comments" or by writing me at TalkTop65@aol.com); and (4) telling your friends and political allies about this site and providing them links to it. Thanks for your support.
On my Pennsylvania blog, I have a piece about two congressional candidates (Melissa Hart and Toni Gilhooley) whom I'm urging to link themselves closely to John McCain's presidential bid. It's a strategy I believe is applicable to most Republican congressional candidates across the nation. If you agree, please forward it to your own favorite congressional candidate.
One key question that hasn't been answered yet is whether Hillary supporters should back John McCain -- and if so, why? I'd love to hear your thoughts on that issue. Another critical matter is how (and to what degree) Hillary should endorse Obama. If she believes he would be a bad President, should she endorse him at all -- or perhaps rest her wounded spirit incommunicado in Hawaii? If she has to choose between Party and country, won't she choose country?
If I had any direct contact with Senator Clinton, these are some of the questions I'd ask her -- respectfully but forcefully.
Some months ago Mrs. Clinton said the following: "I have a lifetime of experience. Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience. Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002 [against the Iraq War]." In those comments, she was suggesting that McCain has the necessary experience to be President -- and that Obama doesn't.
Many people in Sen. Clinton's Party will tell her, "Hillary, it's time to 'take one for the team' and to strongly support Obama for the presidency. If she gives into that request/demand, it would be a terrible way to conduct a life. This nation -- her nation, mine, and yours -- does face the huge challenges she's discussed in the campaign.
From his record, John McCain has the experience -- and the character -- to deal with them. From his record (or the lack thereof), Obama does not. He demonstrates great naivete about the way the world operates. He would have great trouble protecting America because he doesn't grasp fully that the nation needs protection.
As I've indicated, Obama apparently does not respect McCain the person. Why? Because Obama doesn't know many (any?) people like the Arizona Senator. Instead, he knows his wife (who calls America "a mean place"), or Rev. Jeremiah Wright (who damns the country and blames it for "inventing" the AIDS virus), or William Ayers (who thinks the country deserves to have bombs set off in public places), or Tony Rezko (who believes that political payoffs are appropriate).
This is the Obama who calls his grandmother "a typical white person." The Obama who thinks typical white people are religious fanatics, gun-lovers, racists, and xenophobes.
Am I underestimating Obama? I wish there were some evidence that I was.
And back to Mrs. Clinton: instead of "taking one for the team," she should consider what she owes to a country that has been so good to her, her husband, and her daughter.
I wouldn't mind one bit if John McCain says -- in strong terms -- that the Democratic nomination was stolen from Mrs. Clinton. The thieves were Howard Dean and Barack Obama. The crime scenes were Michigan and Florida, who delegates were denied Clinton.
It's probably unlikely that Senator Clinton will endorse John McCain. Unlikely? Yes. Unimaginable? Not really. Doing the right thing sometimes comes with a personal cost. Doing the wrong thing, however, can come with a terrible cost for a nation.
Life is tough -- and so, I believe, is Hillary Clinton. We shall see, won't we?
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Ferocious Debate on Iraq
I was on BlogTalkRadio Thursday evening with Navy veteran Eric Dondero (host) and Murray Sabrin (Republican primary candidate for NJ U.S. Senate). The broadcast is avaiable (on podcast) at www.blogtalkradio.com/libertarian.
I urge you to listen (only partly because I'm on it and you get to hear my Rochester, NY accent) but mainly because Eric and I launched something you haven't heard recently: a ferocious defense of the Iraq War (and John McCain's position on it). Would love to hear your thoughts at TalkTop65@aol.com.or on the blog comments.
I'll write some on Friday after what Eric and I said. I remember saying that the primary goal of Islamic extremists in the MidEast "was to kill Jews -- all of them if possible" (and the secondary goal was "to kill Americans").
Eric noted -- and I agreed -- that one great reason to be fighting in the MidEast was "revenge for 9/11." He added that most soldiers are willing, if necessary, "to die for their country."We didn't exactly hold back.
Dr. Sabrin said 75% of New Jerseyites wanted U.S. withdrawal. I said that "Then 75% of New Jerseyites are just plain dead wrong." I added that if we fled the MidEast, al Qaeda would take over, oil would go $250 a barrel, and our economy would collapse.
On the show I called attention to the web sites of some superb Pennsylvania candidates: Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Michael Livingston, Marina Kats, and Tom Manion.
On the show, I read a statement by Republican congressional candidate Marina Kats. She said, "I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."
In a story in The Philadelphia Bulletin, Marina suggested what America means to her, an emigre from Russia: "Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz [her left-wing Democrat opponent] strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."
Marina, meet Tom Manion, a former Marine colonel and also a Republican congressional candidate in PA. Sadly, his son Travis was killed in action in Iraq. Say a prayer for Tom and his son.
Hart: http://www.peoplewithhart.com/
Gilhooley: http://www.gilhooleyforcongress.com/
Livingston: http://www.livingstonforcongress.com/
Kats: http://www.katsforcongress.com/
Manion: http://www.votemanion.com/
Media, candidates, activists, and others: Please feel free to post, reprint, forward, or discuss this piece. Candidates: I hope you'll establish a link on your own web site and tell your visitors that I'll be writing regularly about your campaign. The url for this blog is: http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/.
Eventually, our combined efforts should result in tens of thousands of "hits" on your web sites, which will generate various form of support, including contributions. "We must all hang together, or most assuredly, we will all hang separately." (B. Franklin) I receive no financial support or direction from any candidate. If you need to correspond via e-mail, you can reach me at: TalkTop65@aol.com.
I urge you to listen (only partly because I'm on it and you get to hear my Rochester, NY accent) but mainly because Eric and I launched something you haven't heard recently: a ferocious defense of the Iraq War (and John McCain's position on it). Would love to hear your thoughts at TalkTop65@aol.com.or on the blog comments.
I'll write some on Friday after what Eric and I said. I remember saying that the primary goal of Islamic extremists in the MidEast "was to kill Jews -- all of them if possible" (and the secondary goal was "to kill Americans").
Eric noted -- and I agreed -- that one great reason to be fighting in the MidEast was "revenge for 9/11." He added that most soldiers are willing, if necessary, "to die for their country."We didn't exactly hold back.
Dr. Sabrin said 75% of New Jerseyites wanted U.S. withdrawal. I said that "Then 75% of New Jerseyites are just plain dead wrong." I added that if we fled the MidEast, al Qaeda would take over, oil would go $250 a barrel, and our economy would collapse.
On the show I called attention to the web sites of some superb Pennsylvania candidates: Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Michael Livingston, Marina Kats, and Tom Manion.
On the show, I read a statement by Republican congressional candidate Marina Kats. She said, "I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."
In a story in The Philadelphia Bulletin, Marina suggested what America means to her, an emigre from Russia: "Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz [her left-wing Democrat opponent] strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."
Marina, meet Tom Manion, a former Marine colonel and also a Republican congressional candidate in PA. Sadly, his son Travis was killed in action in Iraq. Say a prayer for Tom and his son.
Hart: http://www.peoplewithhart.com/
Gilhooley: http://www.gilhooleyforcongress.com/
Livingston: http://www.livingstonforcongress.com/
Kats: http://www.katsforcongress.com/
Manion: http://www.votemanion.com/
Media, candidates, activists, and others: Please feel free to post, reprint, forward, or discuss this piece. Candidates: I hope you'll establish a link on your own web site and tell your visitors that I'll be writing regularly about your campaign. The url for this blog is: http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/.
Eventually, our combined efforts should result in tens of thousands of "hits" on your web sites, which will generate various form of support, including contributions. "We must all hang together, or most assuredly, we will all hang separately." (B. Franklin) I receive no financial support or direction from any candidate. If you need to correspond via e-mail, you can reach me at: TalkTop65@aol.com.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
GOP CANDIDATES ATTRACTING HILLARY SUPPORTERS
Media, candidates, and others: Please feel free to post, reprint, forward, or discuss this piece. Please make mention of the fact that this article originally appeared on: http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com. If you have a blog or web site, please establish a link. Thanks. "We must all hang together, or most assuredly, we will all hang separately." (B. Franklin)
Tomorrow I'm going to write about the following piece from Politico.com: GOP Leaders Warn of Election Disasterpolitico.com — Shellshocked House Republicans got warnings from leaders past and present Tuesday: Your party’s message isn’t good enough to prevent disaster in November, and neither is the NRCC’s [National Republican Congressional Committee's] money. The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama or anti-Rev. Wright campaign, they are simply going to fail. More… (US Elections 2008)
The article's message is either poppycock or balderdash. I haven't figured out which. A candidate's "brand" is not the Party. Rather, it is the candidate herself or himself. Also, if those supposed Republican "leaders" had done a better job leading, well, things would be better.
There's much hand-wringing lately over the loss of Republican candidate Woody Jenkins in a supposedly "safe" election in Louisiana. As Karl Rove put it Tuesday night, "Look, Woody Jenkins [who's lost more elections than Britney Spears has mispaced underwear] is a fine man, but he's terrible candidate." I support only exceptional candidates.
As for Woody's loss, the best way to get candidates for congressional races is NOT to "round up all the usual suspects." Instead, get people who have great integrity and a real passion for the voters of their district. They usually win. More to come on Wednesday.
On my Pennsylvania-specific blog, I have posted a strategy for Keystone State congressional candidates. Since it has national implications, I'm re-posting it here on this national blog. ON THIS BLOG THE EMPHASIS WILL NOT BE ON PROVIDING TIDBITS OF INFORMATION, BUT RATHER ON STRATEGY AND TACTICS FOR WINNING.
"[There's] this aspect of the Boy's Club ganging up on her [Hillary] and shoving her out." Chuck Todd, MSNBC
Barack Obama will almost certainly be the Democrats' presidential nominee. The question for presidential nominee John McCain and congressional candidates like Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Michael Livingston, and Marina Kats is how can they pick up the votes of Hillary Clinton supporters.
A lot of Hillary voters, as many as 45%, say they will not vote for Obama. If they will defect from the Democratic nominee, they may just defect from "down-ballot" candidates.
Melissa, Toni, and Marina can appeal to many disaffected Hillary backers. One major way they can do so is to emphasize the need for Pennsylvania to elect women to federal offices, including the presidency and the Congress. The Republican candidates need to emphasize the many things they have in common with Hillary voters, especially their belief that Mrs. Clinton was mistreated by the national media (which is true) and by the arbitrary rules set by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean (also true).
Melissa, Toni, and Marina should say very explicitly -- and often -- that they want the Hillary supporters to back them. But won't that offend Obama voters? Possibly, but who cares? They're the left-wing types who aren't going to vote for any Republicans.
Consider a few example of results from the Pennsylvania Primary:
4th District (Beaver County, Melissa's District) Hillary 28,205 Barack 12,184
17th District (Lebanon, Toni's District) Hillary 7,316 Barack 5,772
13th District (Montgomery, Marina's District) Hillary 77,762 Barack 75,515
I sent the following e-mail to Sharon Caliendo, a political consultant in the Southwest:
Sharon: Thanks so much for passing my "Hillary Strategy" along to Congressman Tom Cole's office. The issue has really nothing to do with whether someone "agrees" with Hillary. On some issues Hillary is okay (there are lots of issues after all!) and on some she is not so good.
The real question: is Mrs. Clinton getting shafted by the Democrats' "old boys network" and by the national media, which hates her? The answer is yes.
Consider again Chuck Todd's comment last night on MSNBC: "[There's] this aspect of the Boy's Club ganging up on her [Hillary] and shoving her out."
Bingo, Mr. Todd.
As I'm saying on my blogs -- and trying to get many others to say the same thing -- it will help Republican candidates (especially females) to start pointing out that Mrs. Clinton is getting savaged by media and political hacks (Howard Dean) who have done everything they can to wreck her campaign.
Our Republican candidates should start saying that out loud (and in press releases). Many Democrats, especially women voters, believe it's time in our nation's progress for a female candidate to get the nomination for the presidency.
I've been advocating that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin be our GOP candidate for President in 2012 (if we lose this election) or 2016. I've done this not because she's a woman but because she is a remarkable human being and the most effective elected official in any state.
In PA, Hillary Clinton won nearly every county -- in some cases, she won by three-to-one or even four-to-one. We need to reach out (and keep reaching out) to Hillary Clinton supporters. They are the keys to John McCain winning the presidency -- and to many fine candidates getting elected to Congress.
Sharon, I want people like Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Michael Livingston, and Marina Kats to win elections. To do so, they have to defy some of the conventional wisdom, especially the elements that will lead to "conventional" defeats. The three Republican candidates did NOT grow up with "silver spoons" in their mouths, and they need to get that across to Hillary supporters.
In the PA Primary on April 22, Mrs. Clinton got 1.25 million votes. Many of those voters will understand that we're running superb candidates this year. Winning is just so much more enjoyable than losing.
John McCain has said he wants to contest for every vote. I hope every one of our candidates, male or female, takes that approach. Sen. Clinton has campaigned with real ferocity and skill. She should have our respect for that.
(Note: Here's what Adam, a Coloradan and probably the best young political operative in the country, said about the thoughts in this column: "Good strategy. I'm not an expert on PA, but Hillary supporters certainly seem like a key to GOP victory. If you can hang Obama around a local Dem's neck, you might be able to pick of quite a few votes. The only caveat is that you probably can't associate Obama too closely with Dems who backed Clinton."
Note: The following column appeared today on http://www.mccainnow/, an important site bringing together a multitude of McCain supporters. I urge you to go there and register.
Like you, I've been fascinated by the "exit polls" showing that a great many Hillary Clinton voters (nearly half in Indiana) are saying that will not vote for Barack Obama. Very, very interesting -- and more than just "interesting."
On my Pennsylvania blog (http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/) I'm asking John McCain and several great (female) congressional candidates in PA to go after those Hillary supporters. It's essential that John McCain (and other GOP hopefuls) start asking explicity for support from voters who have backed Mrs. Clinton.
Frankly, I hope John McCain and other candidates for federal offices say and do some unconventional things. Specifically, I hope they say that Mrs. Clinton is being savaged by the national media (which happens to be true).
I also hope they say (accurately) that the Senator is being shafted by Howard Dean and other members of what Chuck Todd (of MSNBC) calls "the Democratic 'Old Boy's' Club."
If we scratch Hillary's back, many of her supporters will end up scratching ours.
Recognize that it makes eminent sense for Republicans to treat Howard Dean (an odious creature) like a political pinata. Actions by Dean and other in his Democrat Cabal -- specifically, the dinenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida Democrats should be a major issue for McCain.
We need to sympathize (now!) with those disenfrachised Democrats. We must remind those voters that Dean is treating them like dirt. Deans' strong-arm tactics are depriving Mrs. Clinton of the nomination.
Yes, I'm aware that in politics the actions I'm advocating "just aren't done." Why they're not done, however, is a question that has no real good answer.
In my home state of Pennsylvania, I'm strongly backing one presidential candidate (John McCain) and some great congressional candidates (Michael Livingston, Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, and Marina Kats). I have this terrible sense that if all five of them don't reach out forcefully -- and explicitly -- to Hillary's suppoters, then all they all could lose Pennsylvania.
John McCain has said many times that he wants to "contest for every vote." In the Pennsylvania Primary, Mrs. Clinton got 1.25 million votes. I'm a selfish Republican -- and I hope McCain and others also are. I want a good chunk of those million-and-a-quarter votes to go to oustanding Republican candidates, starting with John McCain.
In recent memory, Senator Clinton said the following: "I have a lifetime of experince. John McCain has a lifetime of experience. Senator has a speech [against the Iraq War] that he gave in 2002." I hope McCain is readying a commercial featuring Clinton making that statement.
Yes, when the Democratic Primary comes to and end -- presumably at some point in our lifetimes -- Mrs. Clinton will go through the motions of endorsing Barack Obama. But her heart -- and I assume she has one -- will not be in it. In reality, she will be looking ahead to 2012 and her race against . . . President McCain (and vice-president Palin, one hopes)
So, let's go get those Hillary supporters. We need to sympathize with them about their candidate's legitimate grievances against the Obama-loving media and the Clinton-hating national chairman (Dean). If we ask sincerely for their votes, we can get them -- and in massive numbers.
Tomorrow I'm going to write about the following piece from Politico.com: GOP Leaders Warn of Election Disasterpolitico.com — Shellshocked House Republicans got warnings from leaders past and present Tuesday: Your party’s message isn’t good enough to prevent disaster in November, and neither is the NRCC’s [National Republican Congressional Committee's] money. The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama or anti-Rev. Wright campaign, they are simply going to fail. More… (US Elections 2008)
The article's message is either poppycock or balderdash. I haven't figured out which. A candidate's "brand" is not the Party. Rather, it is the candidate herself or himself. Also, if those supposed Republican "leaders" had done a better job leading, well, things would be better.
There's much hand-wringing lately over the loss of Republican candidate Woody Jenkins in a supposedly "safe" election in Louisiana. As Karl Rove put it Tuesday night, "Look, Woody Jenkins [who's lost more elections than Britney Spears has mispaced underwear] is a fine man, but he's terrible candidate." I support only exceptional candidates.
As for Woody's loss, the best way to get candidates for congressional races is NOT to "round up all the usual suspects." Instead, get people who have great integrity and a real passion for the voters of their district. They usually win. More to come on Wednesday.
On my Pennsylvania-specific blog, I have posted a strategy for Keystone State congressional candidates. Since it has national implications, I'm re-posting it here on this national blog. ON THIS BLOG THE EMPHASIS WILL NOT BE ON PROVIDING TIDBITS OF INFORMATION, BUT RATHER ON STRATEGY AND TACTICS FOR WINNING.
"[There's] this aspect of the Boy's Club ganging up on her [Hillary] and shoving her out." Chuck Todd, MSNBC
Barack Obama will almost certainly be the Democrats' presidential nominee. The question for presidential nominee John McCain and congressional candidates like Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Michael Livingston, and Marina Kats is how can they pick up the votes of Hillary Clinton supporters.
A lot of Hillary voters, as many as 45%, say they will not vote for Obama. If they will defect from the Democratic nominee, they may just defect from "down-ballot" candidates.
Melissa, Toni, and Marina can appeal to many disaffected Hillary backers. One major way they can do so is to emphasize the need for Pennsylvania to elect women to federal offices, including the presidency and the Congress. The Republican candidates need to emphasize the many things they have in common with Hillary voters, especially their belief that Mrs. Clinton was mistreated by the national media (which is true) and by the arbitrary rules set by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean (also true).
Melissa, Toni, and Marina should say very explicitly -- and often -- that they want the Hillary supporters to back them. But won't that offend Obama voters? Possibly, but who cares? They're the left-wing types who aren't going to vote for any Republicans.
Consider a few example of results from the Pennsylvania Primary:
4th District (Beaver County, Melissa's District) Hillary 28,205 Barack 12,184
17th District (Lebanon, Toni's District) Hillary 7,316 Barack 5,772
13th District (Montgomery, Marina's District) Hillary 77,762 Barack 75,515
I sent the following e-mail to Sharon Caliendo, a political consultant in the Southwest:
Sharon: Thanks so much for passing my "Hillary Strategy" along to Congressman Tom Cole's office. The issue has really nothing to do with whether someone "agrees" with Hillary. On some issues Hillary is okay (there are lots of issues after all!) and on some she is not so good.
The real question: is Mrs. Clinton getting shafted by the Democrats' "old boys network" and by the national media, which hates her? The answer is yes.
Consider again Chuck Todd's comment last night on MSNBC: "[There's] this aspect of the Boy's Club ganging up on her [Hillary] and shoving her out."
Bingo, Mr. Todd.
As I'm saying on my blogs -- and trying to get many others to say the same thing -- it will help Republican candidates (especially females) to start pointing out that Mrs. Clinton is getting savaged by media and political hacks (Howard Dean) who have done everything they can to wreck her campaign.
Our Republican candidates should start saying that out loud (and in press releases). Many Democrats, especially women voters, believe it's time in our nation's progress for a female candidate to get the nomination for the presidency.
I've been advocating that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin be our GOP candidate for President in 2012 (if we lose this election) or 2016. I've done this not because she's a woman but because she is a remarkable human being and the most effective elected official in any state.
In PA, Hillary Clinton won nearly every county -- in some cases, she won by three-to-one or even four-to-one. We need to reach out (and keep reaching out) to Hillary Clinton supporters. They are the keys to John McCain winning the presidency -- and to many fine candidates getting elected to Congress.
Sharon, I want people like Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Michael Livingston, and Marina Kats to win elections. To do so, they have to defy some of the conventional wisdom, especially the elements that will lead to "conventional" defeats. The three Republican candidates did NOT grow up with "silver spoons" in their mouths, and they need to get that across to Hillary supporters.
In the PA Primary on April 22, Mrs. Clinton got 1.25 million votes. Many of those voters will understand that we're running superb candidates this year. Winning is just so much more enjoyable than losing.
John McCain has said he wants to contest for every vote. I hope every one of our candidates, male or female, takes that approach. Sen. Clinton has campaigned with real ferocity and skill. She should have our respect for that.
(Note: Here's what Adam, a Coloradan and probably the best young political operative in the country, said about the thoughts in this column: "Good strategy. I'm not an expert on PA, but Hillary supporters certainly seem like a key to GOP victory. If you can hang Obama around a local Dem's neck, you might be able to pick of quite a few votes. The only caveat is that you probably can't associate Obama too closely with Dems who backed Clinton."
Note: The following column appeared today on http://www.mccainnow/, an important site bringing together a multitude of McCain supporters. I urge you to go there and register.
Like you, I've been fascinated by the "exit polls" showing that a great many Hillary Clinton voters (nearly half in Indiana) are saying that will not vote for Barack Obama. Very, very interesting -- and more than just "interesting."
On my Pennsylvania blog (http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/) I'm asking John McCain and several great (female) congressional candidates in PA to go after those Hillary supporters. It's essential that John McCain (and other GOP hopefuls) start asking explicity for support from voters who have backed Mrs. Clinton.
Frankly, I hope John McCain and other candidates for federal offices say and do some unconventional things. Specifically, I hope they say that Mrs. Clinton is being savaged by the national media (which happens to be true).
I also hope they say (accurately) that the Senator is being shafted by Howard Dean and other members of what Chuck Todd (of MSNBC) calls "the Democratic 'Old Boy's' Club."
If we scratch Hillary's back, many of her supporters will end up scratching ours.
Recognize that it makes eminent sense for Republicans to treat Howard Dean (an odious creature) like a political pinata. Actions by Dean and other in his Democrat Cabal -- specifically, the dinenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida Democrats should be a major issue for McCain.
We need to sympathize (now!) with those disenfrachised Democrats. We must remind those voters that Dean is treating them like dirt. Deans' strong-arm tactics are depriving Mrs. Clinton of the nomination.
Yes, I'm aware that in politics the actions I'm advocating "just aren't done." Why they're not done, however, is a question that has no real good answer.
In my home state of Pennsylvania, I'm strongly backing one presidential candidate (John McCain) and some great congressional candidates (Michael Livingston, Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, and Marina Kats). I have this terrible sense that if all five of them don't reach out forcefully -- and explicitly -- to Hillary's suppoters, then all they all could lose Pennsylvania.
John McCain has said many times that he wants to "contest for every vote." In the Pennsylvania Primary, Mrs. Clinton got 1.25 million votes. I'm a selfish Republican -- and I hope McCain and others also are. I want a good chunk of those million-and-a-quarter votes to go to oustanding Republican candidates, starting with John McCain.
In recent memory, Senator Clinton said the following: "I have a lifetime of experince. John McCain has a lifetime of experience. Senator has a speech [against the Iraq War] that he gave in 2002." I hope McCain is readying a commercial featuring Clinton making that statement.
Yes, when the Democratic Primary comes to and end -- presumably at some point in our lifetimes -- Mrs. Clinton will go through the motions of endorsing Barack Obama. But her heart -- and I assume she has one -- will not be in it. In reality, she will be looking ahead to 2012 and her race against . . . President McCain (and vice-president Palin, one hopes)
So, let's go get those Hillary supporters. We need to sympathize with them about their candidate's legitimate grievances against the Obama-loving media and the Clinton-hating national chairman (Dean). If we ask sincerely for their votes, we can get them -- and in massive numbers.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Huckabee Supporters: Back Hart, Gilhooley
I'll add some comments tonight about the Hillary-Barack circus. Both of them become more demagogic and embarrassing with every passing day.
I sent the following to Larry Perrault. He's an important political thinker/activist/blogger/social conservative in Houston, Texas. He was a significant and effective supporter of Gov. Mike Huckabee and now endorses John McCain. I'm trying to get him and other Huckabee advocates interested/involved in some of our fascinating races in Pennsylvania (McCain, Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Marina Kats, Mike Livingston, and others).
Larry, Kathy Morrison is absolutely one of the best people going with Internet politics -- an extremely helpful woman that I'm trying to put in touch with several of my "adopted" congressional candidates. People like Kathy and Sharon Caliendo do not recommend spending a gazillion dollars on TV. Instead, they advocate some low-cost ways of "building the circles" -- making small circles of support into large ones that start "smelling like victory."
Two of the candidates I'm backing (Hart and Gilhooley) are running against incumbent Democrats who masquerade at "moderate-conservative" Democrats. Thus, my candidates need to do the difficult task of "re-branding" their opponents as backers of people like Obama, Pelosi, and Murtha (which in fact they are).
The only things that truly work well in politics are simple things, and "outing" liberals who swear they're conservatives is not a simple task.
Remember (actually, nobody's old enough to) when Harry Truman ran against "the do-nothing Congress." Well, he didn't run for or against very much else, but as Gov. Dewey found in 1948, the "do nothing Congress" was a powerful image/slogan.
I'm delighted that Melissa Hart is running "against" Obama (and her opponent's flirtation with the Illinois Senator) and Nancy Pelosi, whom Jason Altmire backed for Speaker of the House. Coincidentally (or not), Toni Gilhooley's opponent, Tim Holden, also voted for Ms. Pelosi, from San Francisco (a town that Pennsylvanians place somewhere between Sodom and Gomorrah). Altmire has not been able to make up his mind between Obama and Clinton.
If I were Toni, I would be telling everybody in Harrisburg and parts east that Tim Holden can't make up his mind between Obama and Clinton, both of whom are "totally unacceptable to the people of central Pennsylvania."Both Altmire and Holden apparently have relatively high "favorables," but that will change if Melissa and Toni can portray them for what their votes truly indicate they are: Nancy Pelosi's "groupies."
Melissa and Toni need to keep the Democrats constantly on the defensive by blasting them for "the company that they keep." Obama criticized Pennsylvanians for clinging to Christianity, guns, racism, and xenophobia. Does Congressman Altmire agree or disagree? I hope she asks him that face-to-face. I expect Mrs. Gilhooley will do the same with Holden.
John McCain should win Melissa's district by something in the range of 56-57% to 44% to 43%. (Bush won the district by 54-45). Thus, McCain will be an extremely important "shadow figure" in Melissa's campaign.
In 2006, the DNC, Altmire, and 527s tried to tar Melissa by linking her to Bush and Santorum, and they had some success. I assure you Altmire and friends are NOT going to associate her with McCain. I'm currently going around talking about the "McCain-Hart ticket."
The old saying was, "As Maine goes, so goes the nation." I believe that as McCain goes in western Pennsylvania (and he should go very well), so goes the marvellous Ms. Hart.
John McCain should win Toni Gilhooley's district by perhaps 59% to 60% against 41% or 40%. Bush won in 2004 by 58% to 42% There are early signs that Obama could lay a huge egg in Pennsylvania. Again, as John McCain goes, so goes Toni Gilhooley. The key is to get across to voters that a vote for Tim Holden is a vote for Barack Obama (the probable nominee). Toni needs to drive home the point that it makes no sense to vote for John McCain and then to vote for Tim Holden.
Larry (Perrault), you are one of the more articulate pro-life spokesmen in the country. Melissa Hart and Toni Gilhooley are staunchly pro-life and have the moral fortitude to advance that cause in DC.
Altmire claims to be pro-life, but he voted for federal financing of embryonic stem cell research. Holden also claims to be pro-life but he is supporting a Democrat leadership that's relentlessly "pro-death" -- and that won't even allow a vote on any proposal that might in any way advance the cause of life. Altmire and Holden can't continue to have it both ways.
Larry, I hope you and all other Huckabee backers will consider "adopting" these superb candidates. They need support, financial and otherwise, and the key to their gaining such support is that they eminently deserve it. God bless.
I sent the following to Larry Perrault. He's an important political thinker/activist/blogger/social conservative in Houston, Texas. He was a significant and effective supporter of Gov. Mike Huckabee and now endorses John McCain. I'm trying to get him and other Huckabee advocates interested/involved in some of our fascinating races in Pennsylvania (McCain, Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Marina Kats, Mike Livingston, and others).
Larry, Kathy Morrison is absolutely one of the best people going with Internet politics -- an extremely helpful woman that I'm trying to put in touch with several of my "adopted" congressional candidates. People like Kathy and Sharon Caliendo do not recommend spending a gazillion dollars on TV. Instead, they advocate some low-cost ways of "building the circles" -- making small circles of support into large ones that start "smelling like victory."
Two of the candidates I'm backing (Hart and Gilhooley) are running against incumbent Democrats who masquerade at "moderate-conservative" Democrats. Thus, my candidates need to do the difficult task of "re-branding" their opponents as backers of people like Obama, Pelosi, and Murtha (which in fact they are).
The only things that truly work well in politics are simple things, and "outing" liberals who swear they're conservatives is not a simple task.
Remember (actually, nobody's old enough to) when Harry Truman ran against "the do-nothing Congress." Well, he didn't run for or against very much else, but as Gov. Dewey found in 1948, the "do nothing Congress" was a powerful image/slogan.
I'm delighted that Melissa Hart is running "against" Obama (and her opponent's flirtation with the Illinois Senator) and Nancy Pelosi, whom Jason Altmire backed for Speaker of the House. Coincidentally (or not), Toni Gilhooley's opponent, Tim Holden, also voted for Ms. Pelosi, from San Francisco (a town that Pennsylvanians place somewhere between Sodom and Gomorrah). Altmire has not been able to make up his mind between Obama and Clinton.
If I were Toni, I would be telling everybody in Harrisburg and parts east that Tim Holden can't make up his mind between Obama and Clinton, both of whom are "totally unacceptable to the people of central Pennsylvania."Both Altmire and Holden apparently have relatively high "favorables," but that will change if Melissa and Toni can portray them for what their votes truly indicate they are: Nancy Pelosi's "groupies."
Melissa and Toni need to keep the Democrats constantly on the defensive by blasting them for "the company that they keep." Obama criticized Pennsylvanians for clinging to Christianity, guns, racism, and xenophobia. Does Congressman Altmire agree or disagree? I hope she asks him that face-to-face. I expect Mrs. Gilhooley will do the same with Holden.
John McCain should win Melissa's district by something in the range of 56-57% to 44% to 43%. (Bush won the district by 54-45). Thus, McCain will be an extremely important "shadow figure" in Melissa's campaign.
In 2006, the DNC, Altmire, and 527s tried to tar Melissa by linking her to Bush and Santorum, and they had some success. I assure you Altmire and friends are NOT going to associate her with McCain. I'm currently going around talking about the "McCain-Hart ticket."
The old saying was, "As Maine goes, so goes the nation." I believe that as McCain goes in western Pennsylvania (and he should go very well), so goes the marvellous Ms. Hart.
John McCain should win Toni Gilhooley's district by perhaps 59% to 60% against 41% or 40%. Bush won in 2004 by 58% to 42% There are early signs that Obama could lay a huge egg in Pennsylvania. Again, as John McCain goes, so goes Toni Gilhooley. The key is to get across to voters that a vote for Tim Holden is a vote for Barack Obama (the probable nominee). Toni needs to drive home the point that it makes no sense to vote for John McCain and then to vote for Tim Holden.
Larry (Perrault), you are one of the more articulate pro-life spokesmen in the country. Melissa Hart and Toni Gilhooley are staunchly pro-life and have the moral fortitude to advance that cause in DC.
Altmire claims to be pro-life, but he voted for federal financing of embryonic stem cell research. Holden also claims to be pro-life but he is supporting a Democrat leadership that's relentlessly "pro-death" -- and that won't even allow a vote on any proposal that might in any way advance the cause of life. Altmire and Holden can't continue to have it both ways.
Larry, I hope you and all other Huckabee backers will consider "adopting" these superb candidates. They need support, financial and otherwise, and the key to their gaining such support is that they eminently deserve it. God bless.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Republicans: Good Investments, Bad Investments
Question: Is it possible that, as 54% of the American people believe, that Barack Obama shared a least some views with Rev. Jeremiah Wright?
Answer: My greatest fear is that he shares many such views. Michelle Obama has said, "In 2008 America is a mean place" and that she has only become "proud of [her] country" as her husband has become successful in the primaries. Frankly, does Obama agree with his wife? Who knows? Right now, Obama looks dispirted and unelectable.
Since this is a national blog -- one that talks a lot about the presidential race -- why have I been discussing congressional races in Pennsylvania? I'm doing so because it's essential that McCain, if he wins on Nov. 4, have enough Republicans in Congress to keep him from having a failed presidency. If he has to depend on Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, then God save the republic.
As you've been hearing for some time, Pennsylvania, where I live, will be a crucial battleground in this year's election. If John McCain wins the Keystone State, it's probable he will be the next President.
For McCain to win, the Republican Party must get out the vote. That will require a lot of organization at the district (congressional), county, and local levels. Right now, the organizational capacity is questionable. The Party in Pennsylvania -- and other states -- is still reeling from the heavy losses in 2006. The stench from the Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham, and Bob Ney scandals has not yet fully abated.
I've been supporting several Republican candidates between I believe they and John McCain can build upon one another's strength. If those candidates flounder, it will hurt the Republican cause in general and our presidential hopes in particular.
The candidates I've endorsed include Melissa Hart (in the 4th district -- where I reside -- opposing Democrat incumbent Jason Altmire); Marina Kats (in the 13th district, opposing Democrat incumbent Allyson Schwartz); Toni Gilhooley (in the 17th district, opposing Democrat incumbent Tim Holden); and Michael Livingston (in the 2d district, opposing Democrat incumbent Chaka Fattah).
If I can read the national Republican Party's mind -- and, in this single case, I believe I can -- they believe Melissa Hart almost certainly will win. Frankly, Melissa's loss in 2006 was a fluke, a result of a temporary anti-Republican tidal wave.
What does the national GOP think about the prospects for the other candidates, Kats, Gilhooley, and Livingston? They probably believe all three will lose. They might be right in all three instances, but -- at the beginning of May -- there's no certainly about next November's results.
Yes, Kats and Gilhooley are currently big underdogs in their races. But I've told them both that I believe, if they do just about everything right, they can win. I'm not stupid, and I know the odds, but Gilhooley and Kats are going build great support in their districts. Both of them, especially Gilhooley, are going to benefit from McCain's strong showing in the state. As for Kats, her youth ntelligence, and patriotism are going to contrast sharply with Schwartz, who has none of those qualities
As for Michael Livingston, he will gains tens of thousands of votes more than any Republican has in his district. He's not waging what is known as a "starter campaign," but he is establishing a foundation that the GOP has never had in the the 2d district. Livingston, a tax attorney and law professor, is a great candidate -- while his opponent, Fattah, is an awful one.
Right now (and again, this is my belief), the national Republican Party, which has millions on hand, is preparing to give Livingston, Kats, and Gilhooley a grand total of zero dollars and zero cents. Why? Because they don't believe they can win.
It's something like the old line about getting a loan from the bank. If you really need the money, the bank won't give it to you. If you don't need it, they'll give you all you ask for.
In 2006, my friend and political ally Diana Lynn Irey ran against John Murtha. In the election, Diana got nearly 80,000 votes in a district where Republicans were lucky to get 40,000. She raised $856,000. She had more individual contributors (7,000) than Murtha. She brought many people -- a lot of them young -- into Republican politics.
What did Diana get from the national Republicans -- and for that matter, from the state Republicans? Basically, she got their best wishes. But as for the check, well, it was never in the mail.
Contrast Diana's situation with that of Rep. Tom Reynolds, a member of the Republican leadership and congressman from a "safe" Republican district in upstate New York (Buffalo suburbs to Rochester suburbs). Historically, it's a district where it's nearly impossible for a Republican to lose. Reynolds, unfortunately, almost accomplished the impossible.
He won 52% to 48% in a district where a Republican should win by at least 60% to 40%. How much did it cost him to win? Almost $5.3 million dollars, an almost unimaginable sum. A good chunk of his campaign war chest came from the national Republican Party.
Look at it this way: Reynold got 30,000 more votes in his district than Irey got in hers. He spent nearly $50 per vote. In contrast, Irey spent about $11 per vote. (Just FYI, Murtha spent roughly $28 per vote.) If Diana had been able to spend, say, $22 a vote guess who might just have won the election against Murtha?
As for the Tom Reynolds of the world, they have access to huge amounts of campaign cash. If they need lots of cash from the national Party, then they're bad investments. Money sent to them is a form of political CPR.
I'm recommending that the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) give Gilhooley and Kats at least $10,000 up front. I'm recommending that they give Livingston, more of a longshot, $5,000. When the three candidates use the money to build strong organizations -- and thus go up in the polls -- the NRCC should give them more money. In politics as in life, money begets money.
In its support of candidates, the NRCC doesn't seem to favor organizational development. Instead, it seems to favor having candidates in trouble spend hundreds of thousands on TV ads. Generally, at least in recent months, those candidates seem to lose.
In politics, that's not a great way to run -- or to build -- a Party
Here's a bulletin to national Republicans: TV ads, while helpful with name recognition, don't work nearly as well as they once did. In support of that position, I point to one Barack Obama. In the Pennsylvania primary, Obama broke all records for television commercials. He spent $10 million, and had a total of nearly 7,000 ads in the state. For all that, he lost to Mrs. Clinton by 9.2%.
There are reasons TV ads don't work as well now as they did a decade ago, but I'll save that subject for another day.
Frankly, the next election does not, if we lose, signify the end of the world as we know it. When we have great candidates -- as we do with Gilhooley, Kats, and Livingston, we need to support them.
In 1974 and 1976, novice candidate Newt Gingrich lost his first two races for Congress. In 1978, he finally won. Sixteen years later he was Speaker of the House.
The future of the Republican Party rests with great candidates like Irey, Hart, Kats, Gilhooley, and Livingston. I fully expect more than one of them to win on November 4. And remember, I'm the one who called Hillary Clinton's Pennsylvania win -- almost down to the precise decimal point.
Note: If you want to contribute to or otherwise support the Republican candidates I've noted, click on the links above. The exception is Marina Kats, whom you can support by clicking on her link, but whose contributions should go via snail mail to:
Kats For Congress
PO Box 91
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
Answer: My greatest fear is that he shares many such views. Michelle Obama has said, "In 2008 America is a mean place" and that she has only become "proud of [her] country" as her husband has become successful in the primaries. Frankly, does Obama agree with his wife? Who knows? Right now, Obama looks dispirted and unelectable.
Since this is a national blog -- one that talks a lot about the presidential race -- why have I been discussing congressional races in Pennsylvania? I'm doing so because it's essential that McCain, if he wins on Nov. 4, have enough Republicans in Congress to keep him from having a failed presidency. If he has to depend on Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, then God save the republic.
As you've been hearing for some time, Pennsylvania, where I live, will be a crucial battleground in this year's election. If John McCain wins the Keystone State, it's probable he will be the next President.
For McCain to win, the Republican Party must get out the vote. That will require a lot of organization at the district (congressional), county, and local levels. Right now, the organizational capacity is questionable. The Party in Pennsylvania -- and other states -- is still reeling from the heavy losses in 2006. The stench from the Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham, and Bob Ney scandals has not yet fully abated.
I've been supporting several Republican candidates between I believe they and John McCain can build upon one another's strength. If those candidates flounder, it will hurt the Republican cause in general and our presidential hopes in particular.
The candidates I've endorsed include Melissa Hart (in the 4th district -- where I reside -- opposing Democrat incumbent Jason Altmire); Marina Kats (in the 13th district, opposing Democrat incumbent Allyson Schwartz); Toni Gilhooley (in the 17th district, opposing Democrat incumbent Tim Holden); and Michael Livingston (in the 2d district, opposing Democrat incumbent Chaka Fattah).
If I can read the national Republican Party's mind -- and, in this single case, I believe I can -- they believe Melissa Hart almost certainly will win. Frankly, Melissa's loss in 2006 was a fluke, a result of a temporary anti-Republican tidal wave.
What does the national GOP think about the prospects for the other candidates, Kats, Gilhooley, and Livingston? They probably believe all three will lose. They might be right in all three instances, but -- at the beginning of May -- there's no certainly about next November's results.
Yes, Kats and Gilhooley are currently big underdogs in their races. But I've told them both that I believe, if they do just about everything right, they can win. I'm not stupid, and I know the odds, but Gilhooley and Kats are going build great support in their districts. Both of them, especially Gilhooley, are going to benefit from McCain's strong showing in the state. As for Kats, her youth ntelligence, and patriotism are going to contrast sharply with Schwartz, who has none of those qualities
As for Michael Livingston, he will gains tens of thousands of votes more than any Republican has in his district. He's not waging what is known as a "starter campaign," but he is establishing a foundation that the GOP has never had in the the 2d district. Livingston, a tax attorney and law professor, is a great candidate -- while his opponent, Fattah, is an awful one.
Right now (and again, this is my belief), the national Republican Party, which has millions on hand, is preparing to give Livingston, Kats, and Gilhooley a grand total of zero dollars and zero cents. Why? Because they don't believe they can win.
It's something like the old line about getting a loan from the bank. If you really need the money, the bank won't give it to you. If you don't need it, they'll give you all you ask for.
In 2006, my friend and political ally Diana Lynn Irey ran against John Murtha. In the election, Diana got nearly 80,000 votes in a district where Republicans were lucky to get 40,000. She raised $856,000. She had more individual contributors (7,000) than Murtha. She brought many people -- a lot of them young -- into Republican politics.
What did Diana get from the national Republicans -- and for that matter, from the state Republicans? Basically, she got their best wishes. But as for the check, well, it was never in the mail.
Contrast Diana's situation with that of Rep. Tom Reynolds, a member of the Republican leadership and congressman from a "safe" Republican district in upstate New York (Buffalo suburbs to Rochester suburbs). Historically, it's a district where it's nearly impossible for a Republican to lose. Reynolds, unfortunately, almost accomplished the impossible.
He won 52% to 48% in a district where a Republican should win by at least 60% to 40%. How much did it cost him to win? Almost $5.3 million dollars, an almost unimaginable sum. A good chunk of his campaign war chest came from the national Republican Party.
Look at it this way: Reynold got 30,000 more votes in his district than Irey got in hers. He spent nearly $50 per vote. In contrast, Irey spent about $11 per vote. (Just FYI, Murtha spent roughly $28 per vote.) If Diana had been able to spend, say, $22 a vote guess who might just have won the election against Murtha?
As for the Tom Reynolds of the world, they have access to huge amounts of campaign cash. If they need lots of cash from the national Party, then they're bad investments. Money sent to them is a form of political CPR.
I'm recommending that the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) give Gilhooley and Kats at least $10,000 up front. I'm recommending that they give Livingston, more of a longshot, $5,000. When the three candidates use the money to build strong organizations -- and thus go up in the polls -- the NRCC should give them more money. In politics as in life, money begets money.
In its support of candidates, the NRCC doesn't seem to favor organizational development. Instead, it seems to favor having candidates in trouble spend hundreds of thousands on TV ads. Generally, at least in recent months, those candidates seem to lose.
In politics, that's not a great way to run -- or to build -- a Party
Here's a bulletin to national Republicans: TV ads, while helpful with name recognition, don't work nearly as well as they once did. In support of that position, I point to one Barack Obama. In the Pennsylvania primary, Obama broke all records for television commercials. He spent $10 million, and had a total of nearly 7,000 ads in the state. For all that, he lost to Mrs. Clinton by 9.2%.
There are reasons TV ads don't work as well now as they did a decade ago, but I'll save that subject for another day.
Frankly, the next election does not, if we lose, signify the end of the world as we know it. When we have great candidates -- as we do with Gilhooley, Kats, and Livingston, we need to support them.
In 1974 and 1976, novice candidate Newt Gingrich lost his first two races for Congress. In 1978, he finally won. Sixteen years later he was Speaker of the House.
The future of the Republican Party rests with great candidates like Irey, Hart, Kats, Gilhooley, and Livingston. I fully expect more than one of them to win on November 4. And remember, I'm the one who called Hillary Clinton's Pennsylvania win -- almost down to the precise decimal point.
Note: If you want to contribute to or otherwise support the Republican candidates I've noted, click on the links above. The exception is Marina Kats, whom you can support by clicking on her link, but whose contributions should go via snail mail to:
Kats For Congress
PO Box 91
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
Friday, May 2, 2008
PA's Battle Royal: Kats/Schwartz
Question of the Day: If it's okay for Barack Obama to get 90% of the Black vote, why isn't it okay for Hillary (or McCain) to get 90% of the white vote? [There will be a new question of the day every, well, day]
Marina Kats, an emigrant from Russia who bleeds red, white, and blue. She's running hard for Congress in PA's 17th CD.
Unfortunately, Ms. Schwartz and her staff have a reputation for being among the nastiest, most self-absorbed people in Washington. I'll provide illustrations below.
Schwartz raises huge (really, really huge) amounts of money -- a total of $7 million-plus in her last two campaign cycles. . How does she generate so much campaign cash? In the usual way, by selling out to every special interest group and radical individual that wave bagfuls of cash at her. Go to OpenSecrets.org and put in the name "Schwartz" to find out what segments are buying Schwartz's affection this year.
Seventy years ago Allyson Schwartz's mother fled the Nazi onslaught in Austria and came to America. One would imagine that Allyson would have a good grasp on the concept of evil. However, her namby pamby approach to dealing with al Qaeda and terrorism shows she's much better at reading polls than she is looking into "the heart of darkness." Her idea of defending this country consists mainly of uttering slurs against George W. Bush. She has no strategy for protecting the nation against Islamic radicals.
That will be difficult because Kats's professional record consists of being a highly successful lawyer and entrepreneur, a living embodiment of The American Dream. Schwartz's record consists of being a government employee for 30 years.
Spokeswoman Magnuson added, "Congresswoman Schwartz is a fighter on behalf of middle class families." Oh really? Actually, Rep. Schwartz voted to end the Bush tax cuts, an action that would harm families in the lowest tax bracket by increasing their income taxes by 50%. In Cincinatti recently, Schwartz admitted that her tax views, coupled with "Hillarycare," which she supports, would raise the taxes of the average Montgomery County family by $3,000 annually.
Somehow this supposed "fighter on behalf of middle-class families" thinks that raising their taxes is somehow a beneficial act. Raising taxes and then using the money for government handouts designed to gain votes aren't exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
Ms. Magnuson continued that Schwartz is committed to "making sure the streets are safe from crime." She added, according to the Philadelphia Bulletin, that Schwartz "should do well against someone 'who has made her money being an immigration and criminal defense lawyer.'"
In other words, voters are somehow supposed to hold it against Marina that she's had a real job in the private sector -- as compared to Schwartz, who has spent a lifetime feeding from the public trough. (Schwartz's husband is a wealthy cardiologist, a profession that will benefit financially from Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan.)
In terms of crime, under Schwartz's watch, it has gone up in the Philadelphia area like a rocket. Schwartz is not "for" crime -- she just has no idea what to do about it, aside from regularly chucking the ACLU under the chin.
More to come this weekend on the Schwartz-Kats race, one of the most important not only in Pennsylvania but also the nation. If Marina wins on Election Day -- and be prepared to stay up late -- it will be a sign the country has returned to its senses.
Marina Kats, an emigrant from Russia who bleeds red, white, and blue. She's running hard for Congress in PA's 17th CD.Some of the most important congressional races in the country are taking place this year in Pennsylvania. This column about Republican Marina Kats versus Democrat Allyson Schwartz originally appeared on my PennsylvaniaforJohnMcCain blog, which I invite you to visit. If the beauteous and fierce Marina can build NATIONAL support, she will win (much to most people's amazement). You go, girl!
This column deals mainly with Republican Marina Kats's race against incumbent Allyson Schwartz in PA's 13th congressional district (Montgomery County and Northeast Philadelphia).
Unfortunately, Ms. Schwartz and her staff have a reputation for being among the nastiest, most self-absorbed people in Washington. I'll provide illustrations below.
Schwartz raises huge (really, really huge) amounts of money -- a total of $7 million-plus in her last two campaign cycles. . How does she generate so much campaign cash? In the usual way, by selling out to every special interest group and radical individual that wave bagfuls of cash at her. Go to OpenSecrets.org and put in the name "Schwartz" to find out what segments are buying Schwartz's affection this year.
Make no mistake about it: Schwartz gets most of her money from the 20% of Democrats who tell pollsters they hope that America loses the war in Iraq.
Seventy years ago Allyson Schwartz's mother fled the Nazi onslaught in Austria and came to America. One would imagine that Allyson would have a good grasp on the concept of evil. However, her namby pamby approach to dealing with al Qaeda and terrorism shows she's much better at reading polls than she is looking into "the heart of darkness." Her idea of defending this country consists mainly of uttering slurs against George W. Bush. She has no strategy for protecting the nation against Islamic radicals.
The good news is that Schwartz will be facing her toughest opponent ever, Marina Kats, an Abingdon, PA attorney. Marina is a patriot who loves her country, qualities that are not Schwartz's strong point. Sadly, even before Kats got the official nomination, Schwartz and her minions were throwing mud. I expect Kats can win the coming donnybrook, but there will be nothing easy about it.
Earlier, I called Schwartz one of the nastiest people in DC. For example, when Marina Kats became the presumptive nominee, Schwartz's mouthpiece, Rachel Magnuson, said the congresswoman welcomes the opportunity to compare her own professional record with Ms. Kats's.
That will be difficult because Kats's professional record consists of being a highly successful lawyer and entrepreneur, a living embodiment of The American Dream. Schwartz's record consists of being a government employee for 30 years.
Spokeswoman Magnuson added, "Congresswoman Schwartz is a fighter on behalf of middle class families." Oh really? Actually, Rep. Schwartz voted to end the Bush tax cuts, an action that would harm families in the lowest tax bracket by increasing their income taxes by 50%. In Cincinatti recently, Schwartz admitted that her tax views, coupled with "Hillarycare," which she supports, would raise the taxes of the average Montgomery County family by $3,000 annually.
Somehow this supposed "fighter on behalf of middle-class families" thinks that raising their taxes is somehow a beneficial act. Raising taxes and then using the money for government handouts designed to gain votes aren't exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
Ms. Magnuson continued that Schwartz is committed to "making sure the streets are safe from crime." She added, according to the Philadelphia Bulletin, that Schwartz "should do well against someone 'who has made her money being an immigration and criminal defense lawyer.'"
In other words, voters are somehow supposed to hold it against Marina that she's had a real job in the private sector -- as compared to Schwartz, who has spent a lifetime feeding from the public trough. (Schwartz's husband is a wealthy cardiologist, a profession that will benefit financially from Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan.)
In terms of crime, under Schwartz's watch, it has gone up in the Philadelphia area like a rocket. Schwartz is not "for" crime -- she just has no idea what to do about it, aside from regularly chucking the ACLU under the chin.
More to come this weekend on the Schwartz-Kats race, one of the most important not only in Pennsylvania but also the nation. If Marina wins on Election Day -- and be prepared to stay up late -- it will be a sign the country has returned to its senses.
If you'd like to contribute to Marina Kats's campaign -- and I hope you will -- the best way to do so now is to send a check made out to "Kats For Congress" to the following address:
Kats for Congress
PO Box 91
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
The race between these two candidates reflects the critical choices that face Americans this year. I hope you'll bookmark this site and return. See below for biographical information on Marina.
Who exactly is Marina Kats? She's an attorney and entrepreneur from Abingdon, Pennsylvania. She was named one of the "50 Best Business Women in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania" by former Governor Tom Ridge. An immigrant from Russia, Kats is a board member of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society of Philadelphia. She serves as an overseer of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society of Philadelphia. She serves on the Board of Overseers of the Albert Einstein Healthcare Network as is Vice President of Temple University's Presidential Advisory Board and serves on the Temple University School of Law Alumni Board. Kats is the current President of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce. She's the mother of two daughters
If you'd like to learn about three other dynamic congressional candidates, Melissa Hart (4th District), Toni Gilhooley (17th District), and Mike Livingston (2d district) please visit their sites
These fine people need your support . .
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Critical Congressional Races in Pennsylvania
Note: Today on my Pennsylvania site I've posted about several Republican congressional candidates in the critical state of Pennsylvania. My emphasis will be on Melissa Hart in the 4th district (western PA), who's running to regain her congressional seat, and on "new" candidates. They will include Marina Kats (see column and photo below) in the 13th district (northeast Philly and Montgomery County), Mike Livingston in the 2d district (Philadelphia), Tom Manion in the 8th district (Bucks County), Mike Livingston in the 2d (Philadelphia), and Toni Gilhooley in the 17th district (Harrisburg area). The focus will be on how these candidates "link up" with John McCain's efforts in the Keystone State.
What happens in Pennsylvania in the 2008 election (and, frankly, in the 2010 mid-term election) will help determine the success of the McCain presidency. Yes, it's important that John McCain prevails in November, but it's vital that Republicans regain some of the House (and Senate) seats lost in 2006. No Republican or conservative wants to send John McCain to the White House and have him face a Congress opposed to all his key initiatives. The point is this: If you want to support McCain, please take the additional step of voting to send Republicans to Congress. There are 19 congressional seats in Pennsylvania, and it should be possible for Republicans -- over time -- to win at least 14 of them. When that occurs, Republicans nationally should be able to regain control of the House of Representatives.
If you'd like to support any (or all) of these exceptional candidates, please go to their web sites. Alternatively, you can contact me at TalkTop65@aol.com, and I'll put you in touch with them.
Philadelphia Bulletin article on Marina Kats below:
Kats Will Take On Schwartz In Montco Congressional Race
By: Bradley Vasoli, The Bulletin
02/27/2008
Marina Kats, an Abington attorney, became the sole Republican challenger to Democratic U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz in Pennsylvania's 13th Congressional District Monday evening.
Advertisement
Ms. Kats bested Upper Moreland Republican leader Lee Falgoust 178 to 81 at the Montgomery County Republican Committee's endorsement meeting. Mr. Falgoust responded by asking all county Republicans to support the endorsed candidate and withdrawing from the nomination contest, formally decided in the April 22 primary.
The presumptive nominee faces a formidable opponent in the incumbent Democrat. Mrs. Schwartz, a Jenkintown resident and former state senator, is running for a third term in the House of Representatives, having defeated real estate developer Raj Peter Bhakta in 2006 by 66 percent to 34 percent in a district that includes much of Montgomery County and most of Northeast Philadelphia. Her campaign now has roughly $1.6 million cash on hand.
Still, her opponent from Abington does not foresee a predictable Democratic victory. "I am very confident," Ms. Kats said. "We already know that money alone does not win the election." She cited Arizona Sen. John McCain's all-but-certain presidential primary victory over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney as an example; Mr. McCain was out-raised manifold but still prevailed.
Ms. Kats also said that anti-incumbent impulses in America are currently strong and cut across party lines. In Maryland this year, she noted, Rep. Albert Wynn (D) and Rep. Wayne Gilchrist (R) both lost their respective primary battles. No congressperson from the state has lost a nomination contest since 1992.
"There's tremendous anti-incumbent sentiment right now," Ms. Kats said. "I think the fact that she's incumbent sort of goes against her not for her."The Republican has sought to distinguish herself from her opponent by speaking in favor of broad tax cuts and spending reductions. She also opposes amnesty for illegal aliens and describes herself as pro-Second Amendment on guns.
Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."
Schwartz spokesperson Rachel Magnuson said the congresswoman welcomes the opportunity to compare her own professional record with Ms. Kats's."Congresswoman Schwartz is a fighter on behalf of middle class families," Ms. Magnuson said. "The issues that they care about are health care, the economy and making sure the streets are safe from crime."
Mrs. Schwartz, she continued, should do well against someone "who has made her money being an immigration and criminal defense lawyer."
What happens in Pennsylvania in the 2008 election (and, frankly, in the 2010 mid-term election) will help determine the success of the McCain presidency. Yes, it's important that John McCain prevails in November, but it's vital that Republicans regain some of the House (and Senate) seats lost in 2006. No Republican or conservative wants to send John McCain to the White House and have him face a Congress opposed to all his key initiatives. The point is this: If you want to support McCain, please take the additional step of voting to send Republicans to Congress. There are 19 congressional seats in Pennsylvania, and it should be possible for Republicans -- over time -- to win at least 14 of them. When that occurs, Republicans nationally should be able to regain control of the House of Representatives.
If you'd like to support any (or all) of these exceptional candidates, please go to their web sites. Alternatively, you can contact me at TalkTop65@aol.com, and I'll put you in touch with them.
Philadelphia Bulletin article on Marina Kats below:
Kats Will Take On Schwartz In Montco Congressional Race
By: Bradley Vasoli, The Bulletin
02/27/2008
Marina Kats, an Abington attorney, became the sole Republican challenger to Democratic U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz in Pennsylvania's 13th Congressional District Monday evening.
Advertisement
Ms. Kats bested Upper Moreland Republican leader Lee Falgoust 178 to 81 at the Montgomery County Republican Committee's endorsement meeting. Mr. Falgoust responded by asking all county Republicans to support the endorsed candidate and withdrawing from the nomination contest, formally decided in the April 22 primary.
The presumptive nominee faces a formidable opponent in the incumbent Democrat. Mrs. Schwartz, a Jenkintown resident and former state senator, is running for a third term in the House of Representatives, having defeated real estate developer Raj Peter Bhakta in 2006 by 66 percent to 34 percent in a district that includes much of Montgomery County and most of Northeast Philadelphia. Her campaign now has roughly $1.6 million cash on hand.
Still, her opponent from Abington does not foresee a predictable Democratic victory. "I am very confident," Ms. Kats said. "We already know that money alone does not win the election." She cited Arizona Sen. John McCain's all-but-certain presidential primary victory over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney as an example; Mr. McCain was out-raised manifold but still prevailed.
Ms. Kats also said that anti-incumbent impulses in America are currently strong and cut across party lines. In Maryland this year, she noted, Rep. Albert Wynn (D) and Rep. Wayne Gilchrist (R) both lost their respective primary battles. No congressperson from the state has lost a nomination contest since 1992.
"There's tremendous anti-incumbent sentiment right now," Ms. Kats said. "I think the fact that she's incumbent sort of goes against her not for her."The Republican has sought to distinguish herself from her opponent by speaking in favor of broad tax cuts and spending reductions. She also opposes amnesty for illegal aliens and describes herself as pro-Second Amendment on guns.
Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."
Schwartz spokesperson Rachel Magnuson said the congresswoman welcomes the opportunity to compare her own professional record with Ms. Kats's."Congresswoman Schwartz is a fighter on behalf of middle class families," Ms. Magnuson said. "The issues that they care about are health care, the economy and making sure the streets are safe from crime."
Mrs. Schwartz, she continued, should do well against someone "who has made her money being an immigration and criminal defense lawyer."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
