When we are wrong, we say so.
A while back I made a comment concerning the apparent objectivity of Margaret Kenski over her analysis over the poll that she conducted. I have never met Ms. Kenski, but believed by the comments quoted in the analysis article and her prior relationship with the Kolbe campaign showed that she may have a little more invested in the outcome of the primary.
After reading the latest article in the Tucson Citizen I must admit that her analysis is right down the line. It is quite possible that she was selectively quoted in the other article I read. Her analysis is quite possibly the most refreshingly honest that I have seen over the whole NRCC kerfuffle and with her experience, she is definitely in a position to know.
Again, my apologies to Ms. Kenski and I hope to hear more from her in the future as she looks to be the only political analyst the local press can go to that actually adds to the story.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You know, Randall, your analysis might be taken a little better if you actually lived here and experienced what we are experiencing in this race. The fact is, your constant defense of Huffman is quite ridiculous. Why don't you come down here to Tucson and all the surrounding areas in CD-8. Go walk some neighborhoods, talk to the locals, ask them what's on their minds and what concerns them most, ask them what the number 1 issue is in their minds. You will absolutely be surprised.
I don't agree with any of it... am I supposed to stay home on Tuesday because Rove, Mehlman, Kolbe, Click and Diamond have already chosen my candidate for me?
People like you scare me. Which is why I support the second ammendment.
Post a Comment