ترول ایرانی

گالری عکس

Category “2010 WI Attorney General’s Race”

How to Lose an Attorney General’s Race in 6 Minutes

The GOP is very well on its way to a sweep of the races in Vir­ginia for Gov­er­nor, Lt. Gov­er­nor, and Attor­ney Gen­eral (There’s some talk of retak­ing the state’s lower House of the leg­is­la­ture too.), but this just beyond the pale.

In video on Jim Geraghty’s “The Cam­paign Spot,” we show GOP can­di­date Ken Cuc­cinelli destroy­ing his Demo­c­ra­tic oppo­nent in a debate in which the oppo­nents can ask the other questions.

Cuccinelli’s ques­tion: Name the divi­sions of the Com­mon­wealth Attor­ney General’s office and describe what each divi­sion does. (I.E. Describe the job you want peo­ple to vote you into.)

It isn’t pretty and if this were a jury trial, one set of coun­sel will declare the wit­ness as hos­tile for not answer­ing the ques­tion asked of them.

Who ever is that non-lawyer the Dems in Wis­con­sin have going against J.B. Van Hollen, he might want to brush up on the duties of the office too.

Comments (2)

The Thompson Self-Aggrandizing Tour Begins Again

Par­don me while I bang my head against the wall.

In the wake of Gov. Jim Doyle’s deci­sion not to seek a third term in office, a for­mer Wis­con­sin gov­er­nor isn’t rul­ing out a run for an unprece­dented fifth term.

When asked about another pos­si­ble run for gov­er­nor Wednes­day night, Tommy Thomp­son almost sounded dis­ap­pointed that Doyle wasn’t run­ning for a third term.

You know Jim Doyle and I have never really got­ten along, and I would have liked to run if Jim Doyle was run­ning for re-election. (It’d be) much more of a chal­lenge, and much more of a moti­va­tion for me, if Jim Doyle was the can­di­date,” Thomp­son said.But at the same time, the fact that Doyle won’t be run­ning isn’t lead­ing Thomp­son to com­pletely rule out the pos­si­bil­ity of run­ning for the state’s high­est office once again.

Thomp­son said that at 67, he isn’t done just yet.

I always tell peo­ple I’ve got one more cam­paign in me, and I don’t know what it’s going to be. Is it going to be mayor of Elroy? Is it going to be the United States Sen­ate? Is it going to be gov­er­nor? What­ever the case may be, I feel I’ve got one more good strong cam­paign still within me, and I still love pol­i­tics,” Thomp­son said. “I’m still very much involved, and I’m not say­ing ‘no,’ I’m just say­ing, ‘We’ll lis­ten, and we’ll talk.’”

Thomp­son has slowly become the Wis­con­sin ver­sion of The Rolling Stones.  Every few years, he’ll tour (or in this case get in front of a cam­era at WISC 3 in Madi­son), talk about run­ning for some­thing, and then do noth­ing.  It cre­ates a head­line or two, causes the blood pres­sure of a bunch of peo­ple to rise, force oth­ers to chuckle, and make A LOT of Wis­con­sinites real­ize the 90s were a long, long time ago.

Let’s be hon­est with our­selves.  Is Tommy Thomp­son going to run for any­thing?  No.  Why is he on TV talk­ing about it then?  Because he thinks we might for­get him.

Yeah…like that’s ever possible.

Comments (4)

The Opening Shot in the 2010 Elections…

…is fired by the National Repub­li­can Sen­a­to­r­ial Com­mit­tee and it is a good one.

And now a word about the ad from the great mod­er­ate voice in blog­ging (Yes, folks, she’s a mod­er­ate.), UW-Madison Law Pro­fes­sor Ann Althouse.

Via Meme­o­ran­dum, which links to a crit­i­cism by Greg Sar­gent of a minor aspect of this ad. The major thing I’m see­ing here a very effec­tive ad for the Repub­li­can Party. Of course, you can’t beat some­thing with noth­ing. The Repub­li­cans need more than the fact that the Democ­rats are scary. But the ad res­onated with me. Now, Al Franken as the face of that scari­ness may be a bit silly. And, actu­ally, I don’t think you need to go all emo­tive to get the desired effect. I think I’d be more scared by a straight­for­ward pre­sen­ta­tion of facts, recited by a sober voiceover, and no music at all.

I agree with Alt­house on hav­ing Franken as the ‘face of that scari­ness;’ how­ever, he is the face of 60 Sen­a­tors, which is what I believe the NRSC is try­ing to accom­plish with that image.  That being said, the NRSC — which will no doubt be fol­lowed by sim­i­lar web ads by their House coun­ter­part, the NRCC and the RNC itself — has now laid out the fact many Democ­rats know and fear: They con­trol it all, and now they’re going to get blamed for it.

Every bill out of Wash­ing­ton, is now totally under their con­trol and can be shaped in what­ever way they want.  No won­der a poll like this came out last week, and was almost entirely ignored by the MSM.

Forty-five per­cent (45%) of U.S. vot­ers say it’s bet­ter for the coun­try if the White House and Con­gress are each run by a dif­fer­ent polit­i­cal party.

Twenty-seven per­cent (27%) dis­agree and say it’s bet­ter to have one polit­i­cal party run­ning both branches of gov­ern­ment, as is cur­rently the case, accord­ing to a new Ras­mussen Reports national tele­phone sur­vey. But slightly more (28%) aren’t sure which is best.

This marks a seven-point drop in sup­port for one-party rule from a sur­vey just before last November’s elec­tion when it seemed clear Democ­rats were going to win the pres­i­dency and strengthen their con­trol of Congress.

Sixty-two per­cent (62%) of Repub­li­cans and 51% of vot­ers not affil­i­ated with either major polit­i­cal party say it’s bet­ter for Amer­ica to have the White House and Con­gress run by dif­fer­ent parties.

Since Democ­rats now con­trol the pres­i­dency and both houses of Con­gress, it’s not sur­pris­ing that they dis­agree, but they’re far more closely divided than one might expect. While 39% of Demo­c­ra­tic vot­ers think rule by one party is best, 27% like the idea of divided gov­ern­ment, and 34% are undecided.

Fifty-two per­cent (52%) of pop­ulist or Main­stream Amer­ica say it’s bet­ter for the coun­try to have the White House and Con­gress in the hands of dif­fer­ent par­ties, but the Polit­i­cal Class is evenly divided on the question.

The National GOP has a chance to build its mes­sage on a sim­ple fact: Democ­rats will need a check.

It will be up to them to then have the can­di­dates, the mes­sag­ing, and then the track record to do just that if given the oppor­tu­nity to lead in Wash­ing­ton (and in Madi­son as well) to do just that.

Comments (7)