Thursday, May 11, 2006

More Public Endorsements

The pattern seems to be set here folks. This week, I posted the Mercury News Endorsements of Pete McCloskey and Jerry McNerney. Today, the Sacramento Bee made it's endorsements public. Good new for Pete, not so good news for Jerry.

The headline is "McCloskey over Pombo in GOP race..." Their net comment on McCloskey is that "Republicans like him are all too rare these days. "

Then, in the Democratic Race, they pick Filson, based mainly on giving the new guy a chance.
For those who want to see a winning candidate in the fall, the race is between McNerney and Filson. If McNerney had run stronger in 2004, Democrats might be justified in giving him another chance. Filson would offer Pombo ample competition in the fall. Give Filson his shot at the 11th District seat.
I wish that they had found a stronger reason to back a candidate based on this election cycle's realities. But, I guess that this just evens the score.

Now, what is the Stockton Record going to do? After endorsing Pombo, will they even make a recommendation for the Democrats? Actually, I would quit blogging if the Record did not endorse Pombo. My wife has a lot of work for me to do with the additional time.

13 Comments:

Blogger karelia said...

The idea of "giving the new guy a chance" really irks me. In a race with as big of a coverage of a congressional district (too big to reach most voters personally), with an established incumbent, the only way that a challenger can win is to keep building up the name recognition. I once spoke to Pete Stark (the congress member representing a neighboring district) and he said that he hoped McNerney would keep running until he won ... it just takes time to build up name recognition. So saying that a candidate who lost had their chance, let's give the new guy a shot is really counterproductive. Pombo is certainly vulnerable so he might lose for that reason, but having name recognition will certainly help his opponent. This is why we need to support Jerry McNerney, who has momentum in name recognition.

11:25 AM, May 11, 2006  
Blogger VPO said...

Jerry who?

Seriously, though, I think the article in the Stockton Record today that quotes Republican political oddsmaker Allan Hoffenblum makes a good point -- the voters would not so much be voting FOR the Democrat as AGAINST Pombo. In that case, name recognition is not as critical, just the he is the "Democratic Candidate" or, more precisely, that he is "Not Pombo".

Hoffenblum downplayed any strength Filson and McNerney showed in the survey because the 11th District is still GOP turf.

"If Pombo loses, the voters will be throwing him out - not putting Democrats in," he said.

12:43 PM, May 11, 2006  
Anonymous rick said...

Karelia:

You're essentially saying we should support McNerney because he is the perennial candidate.

Here's a trivia question: How many incumbent members of the House of Representatives (and who had not previously held elective office) won their seats after a previous unsuccessful attempt(s) for the same seat. The only one I can think of is David Drier. Regardless, the answer is probably less than five. That in itself makes the Sacramento Bee's stand perfectly understandable.

8:05 PM, May 11, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. 2% of a buck again (with a reward to Robert, er, Rick)

1) Robert, er, Rick (I think we'll just refer to you as Rob(b)erRick from now on -- like it?) -- you are clearly the King Of The Cheap Shot (KOTCS) on this blog -- congrats!

2) First off, Dreier is how his last name is spelled, so DO YOUR HOMEWORK, homey!

3) He's not the only one (or Republican, like your boss, Filson, oops -- forgot he converted) to have lost the first election to Congress and then won --

March 9, 1832
Makes first-known published political announcement
August 6, 1832
Loses first campaign for Illinois House of Representatives
August 4, 1834
Wins election to first term in Illinois House of Representatives


Check out some history before you claim to pronounce upon it, you FM!


4) Is that all you D-Trip addicts have left in the bag? Is that all there is? We should anoint Steverino because he's the new, fresh face, just because the Sacto Bee says so?

Denial is not a river in Egypt.

$.02 out.

9:05 PM, May 11, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rick, to your point about loser candidates.... the list is longer than you think. Not only are there< and have been, many in congress, including Newt Gingrich, but you better loook thriugh history....
Lincoln
Nixon
Ford
Regan etc...

the big ones became huge because they didnt quit.

12:20 AM, May 12, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sorry for the McSpelling errors. been out drinking with the PeteMcMeister again. (burp)

ps. those littllle f'in verifoication letteres are toooo smalll!

12:23 AM, May 12, 2006  
Blogger VPO said...

Anon, your post is just plain bullshit. Easy to come by and post some garbage like that. Ok, wise guy, tell us -- where were you drinking, what was it, at what time? What, can't tell us any details? Of course you can't because you are just making shit up.

You are just another lying punk like Pombo. Or maybe you are Pombo, so worried about McCloskey beating your sorry ass in the primary that you have to post crap on blogs like this. If I was Pombo, I would be drinking heavily too, while watching my political career go down the toilet.

11:31 AM, May 12, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ahem.

George W. Bush.

1978 Congressional candidacy in Texas

In 1978, Bush faced off against Democrat Kent Hance in Texas' 19th Congressional District. The 19th represented Midland and much of West Texas. Bush stressed his energy credentials and conservative values in the campaign. Hance was also a conservative, opposing gun control and excessive regulation. Bush made a series of gaffes that would ultimately lead to his defeat. While campaigning in a rural part of the 19th, he said, "Today is the first time I've been on a real farm." Kent Hance also successfully portrayed Bush as out of touch with rural Texans. A Hance radio ad highlighted the differences in the two candidates' educations:

"In 1961, when Kent Hance graduated from Dimmitt High School in the 19th congressional district, his opponent George W. Bush was attending Andover Academy in Massachusetts. In 1965, when Kent Hance graduated from Texas Tech, his opponent was at Yale University. And while Kent Hance graduated from University of Texas Law School, his opponent -- get this, folks -- was attending Harvard." [14]

Bush went door to door and was an effective fundraiser, but lost by a slim 53-47 margin. Hance later became a Republican, and donated money to Bush's campaign for Governor of Texas in 1993 [15].

9:56 PM, May 12, 2006  
Anonymous rick said...

0.02:

LOL! You cite Abraham Lincoln, who was elected in the 19th Century. Notice that I said incumbent member of the House of Representatives precisely for the reason that we are talking about contemporary American politics, not what happened 150 years ago.

Only a stupid F M would try to compare the 1850s to the 2000s.

anonymous:

Get your facts straight. Richard Nixon was a first-time candidate when he won his Congressional seat in 1946. Gerald Ford was a first-time candidate when he won his seat in 1948. Ronald Reagan's was also a first-time candidate when he won the governorship in 1966. (I should note that the House of Representatives is different from the governorship, but those are inconvenient facts, right?). The only one you got correct was Newt Gingrich (who was a two-time before ultimately winning), but of course, he does not meet the incumbent criteria I had included in my original comment.

To your second comment, you note that Bush lost in 1978. Of course, he did not run for the seat in the next election, which makes your point moot.

Ahem, perhaps you should reread what I originally wrote, as well as do some fact-checking, particularly if you happened to be drinking.

10:16 PM, May 12, 2006  
Anonymous F--kNut said...

Jesus you F--knuts come on people - before I go back to the bar read this - and RK stop stuffing your face with pizza! And get your other hand out of your pants!

You children!!! Read dis...

In 2002, Bean ran against 33-year 8th District Republican incumbent Phil Crane. She charged that Crane, once a leader of conservative forces in the House, had become a "do-nothing" Congressman, and by focusing attention on lobbyist-funded trips that he had taken. As expected, she lost, but gained 43% of the vote--a stunning total since she received almost no funding from the national party. The 8th had long been considered the most Republican district in the Chicago area, and according to some in all of Illinois. Bean's performance was even more stunning since the 8th had reportedly been redrawn to protect Crane. Several former Republican primary opponents and Democratic general election opponents had their homes drawn into the neighboring 10th District.

-----------------------------

Kinda sounds like CA-11, but Shaw was a horrid candidate.

12:02 AM, May 13, 2006  
Anonymous rick said...

O.K...So far, we've identified two incumbents who lost but later won.

Is there a third?

9:21 PM, May 13, 2006  
Anonymous Rocky Balboa said...

Yo ButtaWipeO,

Rocky here. Duh law of averages says you gotta get one right once in a while. Congradulations for beating the odds as long as you did - it ain't easy being so consistently wrong AND a yellow buttwipe at the same time. Like you.

So Pretty Boy got the Bee endorsement. Unlike you, Rocky gonna congradulate your Boy Filson cuz dat's the proper ting to do. You oughta try it some time. You might become a human bean like Adrian said.

You know, Rocky been tinking about all these posts, esp duh ones dat make him tink, like duh ones coming from VPO, Delta, and the cheapskate $.02, who ain't a bad guy cuz maybe he's unemployed. Not everybody can kick in a whole buck like Rocky did for Thomas.

If what yer all saying is true (with the exemption of ButtaWipeO), den Rocky's choice Thomas ain't got a chance cuz he ain't raising all the vasool like Pretty Boy and McNerney. I mean I hate to dis a guy cuz he ain't raising cash, but if you need it to win, and you ain't got it, well Rocky can still add 2 plus 2 and get 4.

Dat being duh case, duh new Rocky poll is now McNerney, McClosky, Thomas, and Pretty Boy in dat order with Pretty Boy still last on account dat ButtaWipeO is on his side. Rocky like what he learning about dis guy McClosky, cuz he can throw a good punch - like Rocky in his prime. But he's a Repuglican, and how can Dems like us trust Repuglicans? But he sounds like a friggin Dem, and he's raising plenty of dough, so Rocky is even shocking himself but he's putting duh Repuglican second. He still wanna learn more about duh udder Repug, the one they call Beano.

Dis guy or goil Delta (it still ain't said what it is yet) seems to really like McClosky too, and his stock soitenly went up wit Rocky on account dat ButtaWipeO DON'T like him. Dats duh ting wit morons like ButtaWipeO - once you get 'em figured out, you got 'em figured out. You know what I'm saying?

Heh heh.

Rocky out.
Di youse guys miss me? Adrian sez I was spending too much time on duh computer, so I had to back off a bit.

10:15 PM, May 13, 2006  
Blogger CF said...

Well, this comment is buried under a bunch of Pombo news, but Filson gained the endorsement of the California Nurses Association today.

LINK

7:10 PM, May 16, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home