Here is the first article covering the candidate announcement:
Well, OK, it's the AP
Hellon is still pretty steamed. I got that. He has every right to be.
Good to see somebody with press creds asking Ed Patru questions. Hopefully there will be more.
Not sure I agree with the final statement. It's a race by all means, but there is a favorite. That is the reason the NRCC intervened.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
The interesting thing about the influx of national campaign money into Southern Arizona isn't who's getting it, but that it is coming here at all. And while it is obviously irksome to those who aren't getting it, it's a very good thing for Southern Arizona politics generally.
How nice, for example, to have something from the checks we send on to national campaign committees come back, not only into our economy -- and hundreds of thousands spent does help -- but also to enliven our regional political discourse.
The national attention this helps generate is also good for us, and not just because it reminds the rest of the country we're out here in the desert. It also is chance to stress concerns of particular regional interest, and to present a regional perspective on national issues.
Finally, who knows but what it may be a boon to our lonesome local bloggers, and stir up some out-of-town readership?
Not a bad influx of money to the owners of local TV, radio, and print journalism either, Randall.
Yeah, and here we are blogging like suckers. . .
The post that started it all back on August 2nd.
To those that may not understand the process, you do not infuse money into 1 candidate's campaign during a primary race that consists of 5 individuals running under the same political party. You DO infuse money into the candidate that has been chosen by the VOTERS to represent your PARTY during the GENERAL election. It is real simple, those that have the MONEY feel that they can BUY the candidate of their choice. This is not the American political process at its best, and this is why we get the kind of POLITICAIN in office that we do.
Mike Jenkins is the kind of candidate that scares the big money brokers. He does not respond to the CLICKING sound of coins.
David B
In fact, anonymous, I do infuse money into the candidates of my choice in the primary.
If my preferred candidates lose in the primary, I re-evaluate the winners and consider whether to infuse more money in those races.
But because I'm not among the super-rich, I never give money to candidates who can't raise money. If you think about it, this makes perfect sense.
Well, just happened to have the TV on just now, and curiously enough, just saw BOTH the NRCC and DCCC ads one directly after the other. The DCCC ad was first, closely matching Graf's "Empty Desk" ad about being AWOL.
The NRCC ad was a positive piece noting endorsements of the the Chamber and, somewhat interesting, Mayor Walkup.
I suppose most folks reading here have seen these ads. What I found interesting was their juxtaposition one right after the other.
It also shows that as of a few minutes ago, the ads have not been retracted.
Randall, you are a VOTER, not a political party trying to defeat ALL of the other candidates of the same party. I infuse money to my candidate, just as you do, as a VOTER, I can't fund a political ad on national TV after I promised not to do so, because I am a VOTER. It is not so much the action, but the act of breaking your word NOT to endorse a candidate of the same party until after the Primary election. We all want to see our candidate selected by the VOTING process, not the MONEY process. Call me old fashioned, but that is the way it used to be done.
David B
Has anyone noticed the high number of REALTOR ads on TV right now? I can only speculate that 1 week before the primary election the time was originally reserved for another purpose.
I can't help but think this all comes down to who gets the money.
I don't hear Huffman complaining. If it were Hellon or Graf, do you think they'd be weeping for Antenori or Jenkins? Who's really getting used here?
Interesting point about the realtor ads. The RNCC certainly freed up the money Huffman would have spent on ads...for the fall. IF he makes it that far of course.
I think the RNCC takes a big gamble here and what they are saying is quite quite clear. "We think Huffman can win. We will put up money to insure it...and at the same time drain the other candidates as they fight for air time. Graf, Hellon, and the others will run out of money...Huffman will have money left.
What it also says is this. And get ready folks...I bet I am right...if Huffman loses...they will not be supporting the winner in any real way. All that RNCC money will go to the hot race in Colorado instead and CD8 for republicans will look a lot like the Drake race in CD7.
Don't count on it. The NRCC is not going to let an open seat go just because "their" candidate didn't make it. If Graf wins, they'll get behind him, even if grudgingly so. The Republicans know they are going to have to fight to keep their majority in both houses, and one thing you don't do is abandon any competitive district. Just wait. They've got something up their sleeve. They always do. The question is how the Democrats will respond - will they just try to "stay positive," or will they actually fight back for once?
Roger,
If the NRCC totally abandoned an open seat election in this climate, especially one on the border, there would be wide scale rebellion nation-wide, especially due to the fact that there is absolutely no real evidence that either Graf or Hellon cannot win in the general. (see Toomey, Pat. . . and ask yourself that if Santorum had that all to do over again, would he?)
At the same time, if Graf wins the primary, this exclusion could actually work to his favor. Remember that he outraised Huffman in the previous reporting period. All of that money came from outside the organized Arizona GOP establishment, as Click put the clamps on that. If the NRCC abandons Graf or Hellon, either could become the poster child for Republicans that are tired of the NRCC. Spread out nationally that may not ammount to much. Focus that attention and money on one or two races, and it would be quite considerable.
In the end, however, I believe you will see the NRCC and Click, for that matter, fall behind the winner. Imagine the problems it would cause for either if the non-Huffman primary winner won, or came close to winning the district without their help in any way. Other people may begin to get the idea that either were no longer necessary.
You make good points as always Framer. I am not suggesting though that there will be no help, but simply that they might not help much. What this move clearly states is that they not only prefer Huffman, but that they were willing to risk a fight among you to get him. It seems to me to suggest that they do not believe that Huffman or Hellon can win. If they did, then why did they pull such a stupid move? I will bet that if Graf wins (and Huffman still might win if he wins over undecideds...few are paying attention to this remember) there will be a half-a**ed attempt to repair the damage with some money to him, but that they will consider spending most of that money elsewhere.
There are LOTS of open seats...and there are LOTS of Republican incumbents facing serious challenges. I agree that they would be stupid to write it off, but it it looks like a Giffords or Weiss can win easily, then those precious resources will go elsewhere.
Hi there:
In the shower I thought of something provocative. This division of the RNCC with Huffman and Graf is not just about winning. What is below the surface is a quiet division in the Republican party. Southern Arizona business interests (the chamber, Diamond, Click, developers, real estate interests) rely heavily on illegal workers and would be devastated without them. Simple. A story in the Star claimed that over 3000 builders are illegal and that there is a shortage of carpenter labor in S. Arizona. While the republican party needs you conservative on the border types to win, there hearts are not in this fight as badly as yours are. A closing of the border is bad for business...pure and simple. It is quiet and under the surface, but I will bet dollars to donuts that if Graf wins, there will be active support from the Chamber for a moderate candidate that is tough on the border but that favors a guest worker program. It won't be an open proposition mind you, but most of the developer types know what will hurt their profits and what wont.
Am I wrong?
This race isn't about preferring Huffman because he is the stronger candidate. It is about wanting Huffman because he is owned by Click who also owns the RNCC. I believe that both will support the winner regardless. It will be interesting to see who is right on this one.
The committee better hope they don't need to buy a new car anytime soon.
You don't know who you're dealing with.
Securing the border is one thing; closing it is another.
Sweeney, Graf and Tancredo may not understand this, but the grown-ups do.
Kralmajales,
Only Pat Buchanan is proposing closing the border and he's not in this race.
You're right, it's not just about winning, but I don't believe this is a developer/real estate issue. TAR and NAR endorsed Huffman primarily because he carried a couple of their bills and pushed for the RTA and Rio Nuevo. There are a number of developers that are supporting border enforcement including some of the leaders of SAHBA. It's mostly the smaller builders using illegals and they aren't that involved in SAHBA and TAR. The Tucson Chamber of Commerce endorsed two candidates: Huffman and Graf. The chamber will support whoever wins: Huffman, Graf and probably Hellon if he wins. But you are right, they will want a guest worker program, but it won't have to be one that grants amnesty for illegals. They will be satisfied if they can get enough workers over the border to handle the jobs you describe whether as green cards or some other temporary worker program.
What is happening under the surface in the Republican party is a growing division between big money interests and grassroots loyalists. Party loyalists have "gone along" for many years and would have continued if not for some of the more blatant power moves such as the NRCC ads. The grassroots conservatives tend to be the complainers, but less involved. They, too have been frustrated and many have become part of the disaffected independents not unlike those that have left the Democratic party. Both Republican groups have been boiling under the surface as they've watched big money interests influence congress and party politics which Mike Hellon so effectively articulated at the press conference.
The race is about power—who will control the party. In Tucson, it's Click versus all the other candidates which is why the four in the press conference were open about their willingness to support each other in the general, but unwilling to do the same for Huffman.
The Committee:
I love your posts...thoughtful and interesting. I agree with much of what you said about why Huffman is their man, but I also think they know that he would not be tough on the border. I bet they also know that he would be likely to support the U.S. Senate bill in reality.
You raise the division between monied interests and party loyalists, but don't get as well about why that division exists. It could be lots of things, but I would strongly believe that here in Arizona (like nationally), there is a big big worry among business types about the pure, tough on the border stance. Graf, Tancredo, and frankly the House of Reps bill gives business republicans the "willies" because they know very well that such industries as development, home-builders, growers, chicken and other meat processers and a host of other businesses would be crippled without that labor. Also, I think that some just don't see this "boogie man" as all that scary...really. The economic benefits of being super tough on the border or closing it (and look at that Goldwater plan!!!) would harm business interests a great deal. They may say they want a tough border stance in public, but I bet they will be lobbying hard against any penalties for employers and any type of border stance that keeps them from their cheap labor.
In Arizona...I strongly believe that this division is not only lurking...it is real.
Kral,
Your points are pretty much correct except that businesses would not be crippled but the loss of cheap labor. They would be forced to offer a decent wage with some benefits. I am quite surprised the Democrats are not covering this part of the story more. The companies would still be able to exist they would just be forced to manage their labor pool wisely. Some automation and training would increase productivity and allow for higher wages. Paying an honest wage to workers will not cripple anyone.
Exploiting cheap labor is not a long term solution to the issue.
Post a Comment