It's hard to blog on anything other than Huffman when he makes the bulk of the news. We hate to give him such an unfair advantage with all the extra coverage, but the other candidates are uninteresting in comparison. Sorry about that, gents.
Here's another Huffman hit piece, this time attacking Mike Hellon. Mike luckily wasn't subjected to the disfigured computer-modified picture like Randy Graf. In fact, Mike's picture was pretty good.
The attack points came from Project Vote-Smart which asks the candidate to check the statements to which he agrees. Two of the three attack points come from boxes Mike did not check. We find it ironic that Huffman would zero in on unchecked statements considering he refused to answer any of the questions. In fact, one could have a heyday attributing positions to Huffman on unchecked statements. Furthermore, Project Vote-Smart states the following:
Please Note
The National Political Awareness Test (NPAT) asks candidates which items they will support if elected. It does not ask them to indicate which items they will oppose. Through extensive research of public polling data, we discovered that voters are more concerned with what candidates would support when elected to office, not what they oppose. If a candidate does not select a response to any part or all of any question, it does not necessarily indicate that the candidate is opposed to that particular item.
Project Vote-Smart posted this on Steve Huffman:
REPRESENTATIVE STEVE HUFFMAN HAS REFUSED TO PROVIDE ANY RESPONSES TO CITIZENS ON ISSUES THROUGH THE 2006 NATIONAL POLITICAL AWARENESS TEST.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVE HUFFMAN REFUSED TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION WHEN ASKED TO DO SO ON 2 SEPARATE OCCASIONS BY:
John McCain, Republican Senator
Geraldine Ferraro, Former Democratic Congresswoman
Michael Dukakis, Former Democratic Governor
Bill Frenzel, Former Republican Congressman
Richard Kimball, Project Vote Smart President
Now, for the attack points. This piece is so irrational that it is difficult to figure out how to break it down for analysis. So, I will simply address one statement in the paragraph along with the three bullets.
Claim: "He recently joined groups like Howard Dean in attacking the National Republican Congressional Committee."
Fact: We are unaware of any alliance with Howard Dean. Mike recently joined with all three Republican candidates in the race (except Huffman) to denounce the NRCC's interference with the election in which the NRCC contributed over $250,000 in advertising for Steve Huffman's campaign.
Claim: "Supports public funding for abortions.'
Fact: Mike left the following phrase unchecked which, according to the survey note, does not indicate agreement.
f) Prohibit public funding of abortions and to organizations that advocate or perform abortions.
Because "f" was not checked, Huffman makes the case that Mike opposes the statement. This conclusion is false and contrary to what is explained in the survey.
Claim: "Will not vote for a Constitutional Ammendment to protect traditional marriage."
Fact: Mike's response is consistent with the claim as shown below.
No i) Do you support a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a union between a man and woman?
Claim: "Opposes mandatory jail sentences for selling illegal drugs."
Fact: As indicated below, there is no check indicating that Mike opposes mandatory jail sentences for selling illegal drugs. The claim in the Huffman ad is, therefore, false.
a) Support mandatory jail sentences for selling illegal drugs.
Only one of four points in the ad has any validity.
Steve Huffman's mailer is easy to declare a negative advertisement.
From Project Vote-Smart:
Project Vote Smart does not permit the use of its name or programs in any negative campaign activity, including advertising, debates, and speeches.
I guess they haven't seen Steve's ads.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Like me, the Huffman camp thinks that Hellon is the serious contender. I'll eat crow gamely if I must, warm and steaming, but Graf is a footnote.
Too bad for an easy win for Gabrielle Giffords, yet I still think she'll take the victory, good for the broad range of working Southern Arizonans.
You're so wrong, Randall.
First, obviously Graf is Huffman's "serious contender" as demonstrated by the poll numbers and by Huffman's constant targeting of frontrunner Graf. You do understand what the word "frontrunner" means, don't you?
Second, the reason that Huffman is attacking Hellon is to try to get some of Hellon's numbers. This is where Huffman has made another of many critical errors in this respect. Obviously, Hellon has been taking voters away from Huffman as the two of them represent the so-called "moderate" wing of the party.
Until Kolbe endorsed Huffman, no one knew who the Kolbe Klone Kandidate was going to be. Hellon is (or was) married to Kolbe's campaign manager, has been very close to Kolbe, and even picked up George Gobble as his campaign manager. Gobble has always been in the Kolbe Kampe and even managed a campaign or two for him. It was a coin toss until the announcement was made.
Politically, Huffman and Hellon appeal to the same people and, therefore, split the "moderate" vote. Huffman's critical error means that the "moderate" vote will remain split on election day. And that helps Graf. I don't think the Weasel's negative ads are going to change things very much at this point.
Watched KUAT tonight with Kolbe. When asked about the NRCC he claimed to know nothing about it, he was "out of the country". Funny thing, he is was "out of the country" during the Aiken mess too. Bit of a pattern here.
Project Vote Smart strictly prohibits the use of the NPAT responses in advertising. From their webpage directly above Hellon's NPAT responses at http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=MAZ57977:
Project Vote Smart does not permit the use of its name or programs in any negative campaign activity, including advertising, debates, and speeches.
I wonder what Project Vote Smart thinks about Huffman's prohibited use of their data. I think that I'll call them and ask.
h@x0r:
I actually think you are right in your analysis about the attack on Hellon. Although, I am very fond of Randall by reading his posts.
I wonder is all of this could work on the last week of the election. Huffman has money to keep pounding away...at Graf and now Hellon. Lots of early ballots are out still...he has lots of money to spend. Can he do it?
If he does though, what is the likely outcome? Will it be hard to get the base out now that he has viciously attacked it? But where would they go? He is spending a LOT of his warchest though...a LOT.
Roger,
I don't know if you noticed, but Steve pretty much has already blown his warchest. His cash on hand as of last week wasn't that much more impressive than Graf. If not for the RNCC intervention, he probably would already be broke.
This ad on Hellon was just sloppy. I believe he saved it until the end because it would be hard to fact check and denounce before the actual election. Not to mention that it was a complete waste of money. Most of Hellon's supporters have likely already voted as he actually put a lot of effort into making sure this happened, like an experienced politico should.
And speaking of overall sloppiness, it is the defining characteristic of Steve's entire campaign. If every other aspect of his campaign is such a sloppy mess, I would wager his accounting is as well. It would be interesting to see what would happen if the FEC did an audit of his books. I bet the result wouldn't be to their liking. We have already documented that it appears that none of his website or hosting costs are documented in previous filings.
Huffman is such a tool.
He had all the money and the big guns behind him and has managed to blow it. He also represented a major part of CD8 for 4 legislative terms and the voters there don't even like him. Amazing.
Roger-
I do not see Huffman's attacks on Hellon as part of a cogent strategy; rather, he is lashing out in anger at Hellon for the comments Hellon made last week after the NRCC intervention and the tongue-lashing Hellon gave him at GOP women's breakfast after the Bill Arnold/Toni Hellon fiasco was revealed.
Huffman's petulance is accomplishing nothing but establishing further proof that his campaign is the most mud-caked in Southern Arizona. Why attack the third place guy when that guy did so much with early ballots and when you should instead be encouraging INDEPENDENTS and UNDECIDEDS to vote for you in the GOP primary. The notion that Huffman can peel away support from Graf's hard core believers or Hellon's traditional conservative (NOT MODERATE) base is ludicrous.
Huffman has done nothing to establish his OWN base in this campiagn because he has appeared, at different times, to be either Kolbe's moderate heir...or the "best conservative choice...or the OTHER anti-immigration candidate...or whatever he decides to be based on the curren trends in the polls. Voters know what they will get if they vote for the other Republicans, but Huffman confuses them with his image overhauls, frustrates them with his incessant negativism and seems less like his own man than the others due to the orchestrations of Click, Kolbe and now the Washington power brokers trying to save his hide.
There is NO WAY that Huffman is the GOP nominee. Not only has he squandered his chances, but he is not the person who best represents the values and priorities of the modern GOP. That person IS Graf, although I continue to take solace in that fact as a Democrat because it seems obvious now that Hellon is the only candidate who can bind up the wounds suffered during the primary and unite his party. Giffords can anticipate facing a battered and divided GOP in November.
One more thing...Hellon is now running attack ads on radio against Huffman. I heard one this afternoon. Graf and the Democrats are also hitting Steve hard. This further complicates his chances for success...
Not sure I see it as purely vindictive. If it is, Rex, it is dumber than I even imagined. I think the idea might be that there still early ballots out there and as you said Hellon had worked them hard. Huffman may be doing a last ditch effort to get those remaining moderate ballots to swing to him...which would be smart given that overall argument he makes that he can win in the fall and Graf cannot.
Framer, you are very right about Huffman being pretty much bankrupt. So is Graf.
The dems, as Rex notes, face a run dry set of campaigns that were attacking attacking attacking and not promoting themselves. There will be a load of money to the winner, but starting from scratch now. Giffords has also spent a bundle of money, but there is money in the bank still. Notice also that her ads are about her and get at the Repubs and not her opponents. She can easily keep running them and has used them to boost her name rec. already. No re-tooling here...she will be ready and raring to go on Sept. 13th.
Post a Comment