“To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable.” -Barry Goldwater
Pray tell, what irregularities?Not _every_ poll and pollster can be trying to skew things to make Giffords look good and Graf look bad. At some point, maybe the simplest explanation applies and Giffords really DOES have a 15% lead or so.We will see more details later in the week.
This poll is over a week old and before the Minuteman ads started.
This is obviously bad news for Graf (and the citizens of Southern Arizona and America). Two media polls with the same wide leads for Giffords. The Weekly poll, conducted by a Republican, albeit a former pollster for the loser Jim Kolbe, is the most damaging. I think that the Graf campaign manager, RT Gregg, is right. Randy is suffering from the residual effects of more than $500,000 of negative ads against him in the GOP Primary. That blankity blank, Steve Huffman, should be ashamed of himself. But as we know, Steve Huffman has no soul. At this point, I really do hope that Huffman finds a way to change his life in such a way that when he dies, he’s both homeless and hungry. It couldn't happen for a better person. Anyway, I wanted to - if possible - avoid any reference to Huffman or to Kolbe during the General Election. But it seems that Southern Arizona's worst two Republicans can't stop causing problems for “their own side.” To go along with that theme, when Nancy Pelosi gets sworn in as Speaker and starts her witch hunt against President Bush, VP Cheney, Condi Rice, and Don Rumsfield - let's remember who gave them this ability. That would be Steve "the blankity blank" Huffman and Jim "the original Foley" Kolbe. And don’t forget the NRCC, who by spending a quarter million dollars on behalf of Huffman empowered Huffman to attack Graf. So, it’s funny that the NRCC will actually culpable for making Nancy Pelosi Speaker. I thought that their purpose was supposed to be trying to fight against such things? When you have friends this good, who needs enemies?Now, onto what Graf needs to do to win. Well, he's going to have to start with negative attack ads. This is going to be difficult, because Steve "the blankity blank" Huffman and his negative attack ads appear to have completely drained Graf's resources during the Primary, and it looks like Graf had to start from zero again with his fundraising after the Primary. So, while Giffords was sitting on a pile of money, Graf was not. And if Graf starts negative, Giffords has the resources to burry Graf with negative ads. Regardless, effective negative ads might be necessary at this point. Next, Randy will have to really, really be on his A-game at every debate. In this forum, he has no choice but to attack. It is risky to attack a female too hard in debates, but he will have to find a tactful way to hurt her so badly in the debates that she just wants to run away and give up. Although, I don't think it will be that dramatic, I do think this is the one area where Randy will have the best chance of catching Giffords. She is so wrong on almost every issue, and Randy has to show this fact to the voters and at the same time tie Raul Grijalva around her neck.The next important factor will be getting the Minutemen and hopefully other groups like them to continue to attack Gabby everyday around the clock in as many forms of the media as possible. I think that Randy probably wants to move away from discussing his position on illegal immigration as much as possible. He can discuss her horrible position, but with a finite amount of time, he still needs to broaden his support and reach out to anyone that he possibly can. He has his base on this issue, and they won't leave him, but he needs more, . Then, there's always the factor of the "unknowns” - those little things that come out and destroy candidates days or weeks before an election. Part of Gabby's whole mantra is the "She's so nice" thing. Well, it's quite possible that something could come out to show that she's not so nice afterall. One thing for sure, Graf cannot do anything that would cause a freefall. So far, it looks like his base is very solid. That is good for him. Giffords appears to have a much more fluid base, so it is Randy's job to now steal as many of her voters as he can. If he can accomplish that, this will be a contest that he can win, if not we can go back and start playing the blame game.
Sirocco,I actually agree with your 15% range. However, the details that we got still did not contain party breakdown.With the very minimum of respondants needed for a publishable poll, don't you agree that these would be useful?At this point I am not questioning the bias of the people taking the poll (of the media polls at least) I am questioning if a proper random sampling is possible, especially with all the nastiness that went on with the primaries. The feeling I get is that Republicans in particular are disinclined to be polled. This would not be the fault of the pollsters, but would have a great effect on their objective polling.Again, all my doubts in this area would be squashed with a simple release of poll internals from one of the polls. Funny how this hasn't happened with four polls to this point. Hopefully Kenski will help.
206iscancer -Where's the anger at Mike Hellon who split the anti-Graf vote and denied the nomination to Huffman? Seems to me that the NRCC and Huffman were correct in their assertion that Huffman would be a much stronger general election candidate than Graf.Maybe the Graf supporters should pull their heads out of the sand and realize that their refusal to back a candidate who can win the general election is coming back to bite them. If Nancy Pelosi becomes Speaker of the House, it will be because of the "ideological purity" of Graf supporters and egoism of candidates like Mike Hellon who could only play the role of spoiler.And yes, I know you will disagree with this assessment. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Insider and 206-You guys are hilarious! Both Huffman AND Hellon and their backers caused this debacle by letting personal animus prevent them from unifying behind one alternative to Graf, whether it be one of them or someone else. They also ignored the right-wing takeover of the party because the hard right served as terrific attack dogs against Democrats and a reliable voter base...until they decided to turn on traditional conservatives like Hellon, his ex-wife and Huffman and purge them from the party.Now you are stuck with Graf...whose only hope to win against Giffords is to run the same kind of mudcaked smear campaign that Huffman mounted against HIM in the primary!The irony is delicious and will be even more sumptuous when Giffords represents us in Congress!
206 -I disagree with most every view you have, except for the fact Huffman is an ass ...This line in particular stood oout though:"She is so wrong on almost every issue"... which is an interesting claim to make when on nearly every issue polled Giffords leads Graf (gay marriage being the exception ... Graf had a whole 0.2 lead there).Framer -- I do think we'll see the Kenski data this week in from the weekly, but yeah, none of this is good news for Graf.
206, but he will have to find a tactful way to hurt her so badly in the debates that she just wants to run away and give upHahHahHah!!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HooHooHoo!!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HuhhHAAAGH!! HeeHooHee!!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HooHeeHoo!!Oh, God, my stomach!!HahHahHah!!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HooHooHoo!!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HuhhHAAAGH!! HooHeeHoo!!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HuhhhHAAAGH!! HeeHooHee!!I can’t breathe!
Sirocco-As AZ 8th’s author has pointed out, we’re still waiting for the internals to decide whether or not we can trust the individual polling stats from any of the polls. Like I said the Kenski poll is most damning to Graf, because it was a Republican who did the polling, and I do believe as you do that the Weekly will release the internals on the polling sample. It’s a shame that the others still have yet to do so. If the internals of the Weekly are an accurate portrayal of the District, then Randy is in a lot of trouble.In regard to the unreleased polling sample info, this also could affect any of those questions including the “Gay Marriage” question. The fact that she opposes the death penalty for terrorists is probably an area where the public would not support her. The polls just need to ask the right questions. So, Randy may be doing better in individual categories as well. We just don’t know. Plus, at this point, I don’t think anybody will argue that Randy’s doing a ton better in any individual category. The immigration question is surprising, but you add the Republicans who want cheap labor to the Dems who want cheap votes, and maybe Gabby does lead in this category as well. I repeat that Gabby is wrong on almost every issue. This does not mean that she will lack support though. But even if the public supports her on every issue still doesn’t make her right. That just makes her popular – which in politics is more important than being right most of the time.GOPinsider-Even if Randy wasn’t running, we would not have voted for you. You were a horrible candidate and far too liberal. I’m guessing that we could have possibly united behind Hellon but not you. You need to get over the fact that you lost and start thinking about what you can do to fix the problem that you created by going so negative. ….Oh, you say that you’re not Steve Huffman… Are you sure about that Stevie boy?GOPModeratesAre Extinct-Sadly, you are wrong. Moderates are alive and well in the GOP. The moderates are the ones who attacked Randy in the Primary to make him ruined goods for the General. They are loud, obnoxious, and don’t believe in Republican values a.k.a. GOPinsider, I mean Stevie boy and Jim “the Original Foley” Kolbe. Also, once you started defending all of these GOP moderates, we realized that you must be a Dem. Hence, you now support Giffords.
206,I noticed a small typo in your post above ..."I repeat that Gabby is wrong on almost every issue IN MY OPINION." Fixed that for you ...Gabby can't possibly be "wrong on almost every issue" in the eyes of most voters given the current state of the polling results.As for your notion that popularity counting for more than being correct on the issues, it certainly would go a long way toward explaining why we have our current administraion, at least it's second incarnation.
Sirocco-ha ha. Of course that's in my opinion. But I'm allowed to think that my opinion is always right ;)!But from what you said about the current Administration, I think that it's important to understand that there are many reasons why we have the current Admin. One of the biggest reasons is John Kerry. Many Republicans (at least Paleo-Conservatives) are disgusted with Bush and his liberal views of spend more money on everything (picture Bush as a drunk sailor), added entitlements (Medicare prescription drug plan), massive farm subsidies, CAFTA, trying to push through the FTAA, choosing the Chinese Commies over Taiwan, allowing an over-the-counter drug that will murder countless human babies and could easily fall in the hands of 11-12 year-old girls, steel tariffs, trying to push through Harriett Myers, capitulation with Hezbollah (I thought that we weren't supposed to negotiate with terrorists), the lack of ending the nuclear crises in N. Korea and Iran, becoming buddy-buddy with the dictator of Pakistan, "Comprehensive" Immigration Reform, i.e. reintroduction of the slave trade, refusal to punish employers of illegal aliens, zero control at the borders (this one might finally be on the way to being dealt with but I'm not holding my breath), a budget that has increased by almost $1 trillion in less than 6 years, and I could go on a lot longer. The problem is that Kerry is worse in almost every one of those areas - with the exception being trade, yet I'm not even sure how strong he is on that. Then you get to the fact that Kerry was a traitor after Viet Nam and should have been hung for treason, and you’re left with a scenario of voting for someone who should have been hung for treason or someone who arguable hates America and wants to sell it away to big business. It’s a tough choice to make, but Conservatives just had to plug their noses and hope that Bush got it right with the Supreme Court. So far, it looks ok, but he almost screwed that up too with Myers. We'll just have to see how Alito and Roberts pan out. I'm not into the whole stealth conservative nominee idea. But so far – from a Conservative perspective – they look good.So, the main point of my little tirade here is that Bush is NOT a conservative. While we would love him to see the light and repent and become conservative, there's a fat chance that will happen. Fiscally, he’s the most liberal President since LBJ (and Clinton and Carter are included in that bunch). That’s one of the funny things about Bush, I cannot understand why libs hate him so much. He’s done so many of the things that they have always dreamed about getting done but never could have realized with a Dem President, because Republicans in the Congress would have actually shown some backbone. With Bush as President, too many Republicans have been afraid to vote against him just because they saw what disunity helped do to the Dems in ’94.
Oh no you don't. You may disavow Bush as a conservative, but he certainly is NOT a liberal by any definition.He cuts taxes for the wealthy, but not the middle class. Yes, he spends money like a prodigal son (I would argue this is the ONLY thing he does which isn't "traditionally" conservative), but he spends it on things like the war we shouldn't be in, or on supporting school voucher plans, etc.I could go on my only lengthy tirade, but won't. Suffice to say Bush is not a liberal under any definition of the term.
Sirocco-since when have taxes NOT been cut for the middle class???? My parents are VERY middle class and they got a tax cut... Just like EVERY other group of Americans from the very poor to the very rich. EVERYONE deserved a cut. And stealing is wrong to do even if it's stealing from the rich to give to the poor. They have a right to what they earn. It's theirs after all. You have no right to say that they aren't carrying their weight when they pay something like 50% of the income taxes. In fact, they pay almost 50% of their incomes IN TAXES. No middle class person does that. In fact, ANYBODY would be furious if they had to pay that much in taxes. So don't be so quick slam tax cuts... even for the rich.
TH,Let's try this again ...The rich earn a disproportionate amount of the income, it is not inappropriate to ask them to pay more in taxes. That's not stealing, that's helping support the society which let you make all that money in the first place.The highest tax rate in this country in 2006 was 35% - high, but not close to 50%.Yes, there were tax cuts for the middle class, but as numerous studies have shown the effect for the middle class was fairly minor. Meanwhile, the truly wealthy (those earning about $333,000 or more a year) received much more significant benefits, even proportionately.Further, by letting the cuts lapse (as Congress has done by not renewing them prior to adjourning their session) the middle class is going to be paying those taxes again, while at the same time the tax cuts on capital gains (which are largely garnered by the wealthy and corporations) has been extended two years, at an estimated cost of %70 billion.
Post a Comment