I usually like to write some sort of deeper analysis than just a one-sentence joke with a link, but there’s really not much more I can write at this point other than to say that these poll numbers are definitely trouble for Todd.
http://www.kctv5.com/politics/24070470/detail.html
Troublingly Yours,
Publius
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Left Behind by the KRA
Today in Topeka, the Kansas Republican Assembly (KRA) announced its endorsements for the upcoming elections and shockingly Mr. Tiahrt was not on their list of true conservatives to vote for. For those unfamiliar with the KRA and its organization, this is basically the most conservative organization in the state. People that really want to fight for conservative values join the KRA, and the KRA helps its membership determine which traditional conservatives they should vote for.
In order to be endorsed by the KRA, a candidate for office must receive two-thirds of the vote during a meeting of their general membership. This practice is instituted to ensure that the organization only puts its support behind the most conservative candidates that it can find, and in practice it is a good way to determine whether or not a candidate in any Kansas election is really seen as a traditional conservative amongst the most right-wing members of our state.
While Mr. Tiahrt has spent much of the past year trying to portray himself as the true conservative in his Senate race, it is truly shocking that he was not endorsed by the KRA. It appears that the traditional conservatives of the KRA either do not believe Mr. Tiahrt is conservative enough, do not trust that he is honest enough, or believe that his seemingly more moderate opponent in the election is actually the more traditional conservative. After all of his hard work trying to portray himself as a true conservative, Todd Tiahrt has failed to get the endorsement of the truest conservatives in the state.
This is an incredibly troubling turn of events for the Tiahrt campaign, and one that could be very difficult to come back from. If Mr. Tiahrt’s entire strategy in this race was to portray himself as more conservative than his opponent, this is a critical endorsement to lose from one of the most conservative organizations in the state. It will be interesting to see how the Tiahrt campaign explains this colossal failure, and if they are able to competently convince voters that the KRA is wrong and that Tiahrt should be elected because of his conservative values.
In order to be endorsed by the KRA, a candidate for office must receive two-thirds of the vote during a meeting of their general membership. This practice is instituted to ensure that the organization only puts its support behind the most conservative candidates that it can find, and in practice it is a good way to determine whether or not a candidate in any Kansas election is really seen as a traditional conservative amongst the most right-wing members of our state.
While Mr. Tiahrt has spent much of the past year trying to portray himself as the true conservative in his Senate race, it is truly shocking that he was not endorsed by the KRA. It appears that the traditional conservatives of the KRA either do not believe Mr. Tiahrt is conservative enough, do not trust that he is honest enough, or believe that his seemingly more moderate opponent in the election is actually the more traditional conservative. After all of his hard work trying to portray himself as a true conservative, Todd Tiahrt has failed to get the endorsement of the truest conservatives in the state.
This is an incredibly troubling turn of events for the Tiahrt campaign, and one that could be very difficult to come back from. If Mr. Tiahrt’s entire strategy in this race was to portray himself as more conservative than his opponent, this is a critical endorsement to lose from one of the most conservative organizations in the state. It will be interesting to see how the Tiahrt campaign explains this colossal failure, and if they are able to competently convince voters that the KRA is wrong and that Tiahrt should be elected because of his conservative values.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Desperate Times. . .
As the old saying goes, desperate times call for desperate measures, and it looks like Todd Tiahrt has finally reached his breaking point. Television ads from the Tiahrt campaign are suggesting that the candidate is quickly losing ground to his opponent while his website has busted out all of the stops with their “Moran Mythbusters” series that looks like something that would fit better on a cable television show than it does as a part of a political campaign. Let’s take a look at these developments:
In a recent television ad, the Tiahrt campaign claimed that Mr. Moran isn’t actually the fiscal conservative that he has been claiming, and they cite six votes to prove it. Of those six votes, five of them actually predated Mr. Moran’s time in Congress, and are actually from the early 1990s when he was a state legislator. This ploy by the Tiahrt campaign shows that they are desperately turning to whatever means they can to try to perform some sort of high stakes magic trick.
Their incredibly tenuous claims that these votes represent a troubling pattern of behavior, and that they show how Moran is willing to betray Republicans, are completely ridiculous and unfounded. Votes from the state legislature are about very different issues than votes in Congress, just as votes from 20 years ago were made under completely different circumstances than those that would be cast in the next two or three years. For the Tiahrt campaign to claim a link between these votes and Moran’s future congressional actions is far more than a reach.
This pattern of reaching deep into Moran’s record to make far-reaching claims is continued on the “Moran Mythbusters” pages of the Tiahrt website. Much of their supposed “evidence” on these pages goes back several decades, and even the descriptions of recent evidence is laced with confusing double-speak and even double negatives that make it nearly impossible to understand the truth behind what they are selling.
I’m not even going to get into all the double-speak and irony within their earmark pages, as I have well-documented Tiahrt’s addiction to earmarks. What I really want to know about this Mythbuster series is if the Tiahrt campaign got permission from the Discovery Channel program to ostensibly use their trademarked symbol and graphic as a part of their political campaign. While I don’t really know much about the Mythbusters show, I feel like the Discovery Channel would certainly want to stay out of the political fray of this mess.
I am wondering if Mr. Tiahrt’s campaign is actually illegally utilizing the Mythbusters symbol on their website. He better hope somebody out there can find some answers to these questions before Tiahrt digs himself too deep of a whole with this Mythbuster charade.
Mythically yours,
Publius
In a recent television ad, the Tiahrt campaign claimed that Mr. Moran isn’t actually the fiscal conservative that he has been claiming, and they cite six votes to prove it. Of those six votes, five of them actually predated Mr. Moran’s time in Congress, and are actually from the early 1990s when he was a state legislator. This ploy by the Tiahrt campaign shows that they are desperately turning to whatever means they can to try to perform some sort of high stakes magic trick.
Their incredibly tenuous claims that these votes represent a troubling pattern of behavior, and that they show how Moran is willing to betray Republicans, are completely ridiculous and unfounded. Votes from the state legislature are about very different issues than votes in Congress, just as votes from 20 years ago were made under completely different circumstances than those that would be cast in the next two or three years. For the Tiahrt campaign to claim a link between these votes and Moran’s future congressional actions is far more than a reach.
This pattern of reaching deep into Moran’s record to make far-reaching claims is continued on the “Moran Mythbusters” pages of the Tiahrt website. Much of their supposed “evidence” on these pages goes back several decades, and even the descriptions of recent evidence is laced with confusing double-speak and even double negatives that make it nearly impossible to understand the truth behind what they are selling.
I’m not even going to get into all the double-speak and irony within their earmark pages, as I have well-documented Tiahrt’s addiction to earmarks. What I really want to know about this Mythbuster series is if the Tiahrt campaign got permission from the Discovery Channel program to ostensibly use their trademarked symbol and graphic as a part of their political campaign. While I don’t really know much about the Mythbusters show, I feel like the Discovery Channel would certainly want to stay out of the political fray of this mess.
I am wondering if Mr. Tiahrt’s campaign is actually illegally utilizing the Mythbusters symbol on their website. He better hope somebody out there can find some answers to these questions before Tiahrt digs himself too deep of a whole with this Mythbuster charade.
Mythically yours,
Publius
Friday, May 28, 2010
Empire State of Mind
As many of you have undoubtedly read, Mr. Tiahrt’s campaign recently released a campaign ad that criticized his opponent for raising taxes. Putting aside the dubious and unjustified claims about the differences between Tiahrt and Moran’s respective votes related to raising and lowering taxes, the most interesting thing about this commercial is the fact that it featured several shots of tax forms from the state of New York.
Sure this is just a minor detail from yet another attack ad, but the problem I have with this is that it shows how aloof Mr. Tiahrt is from the people of Kansas. While I doubt that Mr. Tiahrt personally oversaw every shot of this commercial, I also doubt that any reasonable Kansan would inexplicably use the New York tax forms when creating the advertisement. The appearance of these forms in the commercial is symbolic of Mr. Tiahrt’s inside-the-beltway preferences, and the likelihood that the ad was created by some east coast political operative.
Mr. Tiahrt might make claims about how great of a state Kansas is, and he might make claims about all of the work that he does to bring jobs to the state; but when push comes to shove it seems completely evident that his campaign must be paying people outside of Kansas to run his campaign and to make his commercials. Why wouldn’t Mr. Tiahrt use his campaign funds to keep jobs and money within the state?
Todd Tiahrt is a long-time politician that doesn’t live in Kansas and only really seems to care about Kansans because they have propped up his east coast lifestyle for far too long. I believe it is time to allow Mr. Tiahrt to leave behind Kansas for good and do whatever he is going to do after his political career is over [Publius Prediction: Mr. Tiahrt gets a job with some really shady lobbying firm.]
Yours on the range,
Publius
Sure this is just a minor detail from yet another attack ad, but the problem I have with this is that it shows how aloof Mr. Tiahrt is from the people of Kansas. While I doubt that Mr. Tiahrt personally oversaw every shot of this commercial, I also doubt that any reasonable Kansan would inexplicably use the New York tax forms when creating the advertisement. The appearance of these forms in the commercial is symbolic of Mr. Tiahrt’s inside-the-beltway preferences, and the likelihood that the ad was created by some east coast political operative.
Mr. Tiahrt might make claims about how great of a state Kansas is, and he might make claims about all of the work that he does to bring jobs to the state; but when push comes to shove it seems completely evident that his campaign must be paying people outside of Kansas to run his campaign and to make his commercials. Why wouldn’t Mr. Tiahrt use his campaign funds to keep jobs and money within the state?
Todd Tiahrt is a long-time politician that doesn’t live in Kansas and only really seems to care about Kansans because they have propped up his east coast lifestyle for far too long. I believe it is time to allow Mr. Tiahrt to leave behind Kansas for good and do whatever he is going to do after his political career is over [Publius Prediction: Mr. Tiahrt gets a job with some really shady lobbying firm.]
Yours on the range,
Publius
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Ready, Set, Go Get Negative
While I know that the best place to go for impartial unbiased information about the state of this race is not the Moran campaign; I think we need to take a quick look at the polling numbers that were released the other day. [Note: This isn’t to say that the Tiahrt campaign would are wouldn’t give better polling numbers than the Moran camp, just to say that when these numbers are released by any campaign we should proceed with caution]
First, a quick run-down of the information released:
1. Moran: 67% favorable—7% unfavorable
2. Tiahrt: 50% favorable—12%unfavorable
3. Moran holds a 2:1 advantage on the Republican Ballot test
4. Moran leads 51%-33% among Tea Partiers
5. Republican Primary voters believe that Tiahrt is running a more negative campaign (although there aren’t numerical statistics about this)
That last item is the most troubling one out off all of them for Mr. Tiahrt. In fact, when I first heard about the first couple statistics, my initial reaction was to make my write-up about how Tiahrt’s only option would be to go negative with his campaign. Apparently the voters already believe that Tiahrt has gone negative with his campaign. What is he going to do now? Get more negative??
I think that Kansans should want a candidate that doesn’t have to stoop down low to highly negative and controversial advertising in order to win an election. In fact, I make an effort to vote against candidates that go negative just out of principles. Why would we want a person representing us that is unable to run a nice and clean campaign? We should be voting for our senators for the things that they bring to the table, and not the things they claim their opponent has done in the past or will do in the future.
Negative campaigning is almost always based in truth, but twisted to the point where it is a lie. It isn’t a way to convince the voters to vote for somebody, but a way to manipulate the voters into believing something that isn’t true. If Mr. Tiahrt makes this campaign a negative mudfest, I can only hope that Kansas voters see through it and make a more classy choice.
Positively Yours,
Publius
First, a quick run-down of the information released:
1. Moran: 67% favorable—7% unfavorable
2. Tiahrt: 50% favorable—12%unfavorable
3. Moran holds a 2:1 advantage on the Republican Ballot test
4. Moran leads 51%-33% among Tea Partiers
5. Republican Primary voters believe that Tiahrt is running a more negative campaign (although there aren’t numerical statistics about this)
That last item is the most troubling one out off all of them for Mr. Tiahrt. In fact, when I first heard about the first couple statistics, my initial reaction was to make my write-up about how Tiahrt’s only option would be to go negative with his campaign. Apparently the voters already believe that Tiahrt has gone negative with his campaign. What is he going to do now? Get more negative??
I think that Kansans should want a candidate that doesn’t have to stoop down low to highly negative and controversial advertising in order to win an election. In fact, I make an effort to vote against candidates that go negative just out of principles. Why would we want a person representing us that is unable to run a nice and clean campaign? We should be voting for our senators for the things that they bring to the table, and not the things they claim their opponent has done in the past or will do in the future.
Negative campaigning is almost always based in truth, but twisted to the point where it is a lie. It isn’t a way to convince the voters to vote for somebody, but a way to manipulate the voters into believing something that isn’t true. If Mr. Tiahrt makes this campaign a negative mudfest, I can only hope that Kansas voters see through it and make a more classy choice.
Positively Yours,
Publius
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Who’s on Campus?
In a close race where every endorsement matters, last week Mr. Tiahrt received a big one from the Kansas Federation of College Republicans (meanwhile, his opponent, Jerry Moran, was endorsed by the important Kansas Farm Bureau). While touting his new endorsement, Mr. Tiahrt claimed that it was important and meaningful because it was the first time that the Federation had endorsed a candidate in a primary fight.
This is great news for Mr. Tiahrt, and he should be really happy with the endorsement and tout it all he wants. This endorsement will undoubtedly help him gain some support among younger voters which will be great for his campaign. My problem with Mr. Tiahrt’s actions is that soon after he was endorsed by the College Republicans, he then began to twist and turn things and be untruthful and ingenious with voters in public.
Last Saturday, Mr. Tiahrt wrote an editorial in the Morning Sun in which he was ostensibly talking about the importance of debates, while criticizing Mr. Moran for turning down the opportunity to debate him at an event that was sponsored by the Kansas Federation of College Republicans. Now, I might be reading too carefully; but it seems to me like there is conflict of interest here.
If the Kansas Federation of College Republicans wants to start endorsing candidates, that is fine with me. I didn’t go to college in the state of Kansas and am not a part of the organization. I really don’t care who they endorse. The problem with such an organization endorsing a candidate; however, is that they shouldn’t then expect the other candidate to come to events that they organize. If the College Republicans really wanted to have a fair and honest series of debates, it surely would have been in their best interests to withhold their endorsement until after the debate series.
Because of this, how can we blame Mr. Moran for not wanted to attend a debate that is sponsored by an organization that wants his opponent to win? How can the debate possibly be fair and unbiased if its organizers publicly say they are in favor of one candidate.
Furthermore, I believe that Mr. Tiahrt should refrain from criticizing Mr. Moran for turning down the chance to appear at an event that was organized by a group that recently endorsed Mr. Tiahrt. Mr. Moran should have the right to a fair and unbiased debate, and we should afford him the opportunity to turn down debates that will ostensibly be unfair. Mr. Tiahrt disingenuously attacks Mr. Moran for not agreeing to the debate, because the whole idea of this debate is flawed from the outset. By painting the issue in broad strokes about debates and geography, Mr. Tiahrt missed the more important issue that this debate couldn’t possibly be fair.
It’s just another reason why I don’t trust Mr. Tiahrt to be honest.
Endorselessly yours,
Publius
This is great news for Mr. Tiahrt, and he should be really happy with the endorsement and tout it all he wants. This endorsement will undoubtedly help him gain some support among younger voters which will be great for his campaign. My problem with Mr. Tiahrt’s actions is that soon after he was endorsed by the College Republicans, he then began to twist and turn things and be untruthful and ingenious with voters in public.
Last Saturday, Mr. Tiahrt wrote an editorial in the Morning Sun in which he was ostensibly talking about the importance of debates, while criticizing Mr. Moran for turning down the opportunity to debate him at an event that was sponsored by the Kansas Federation of College Republicans. Now, I might be reading too carefully; but it seems to me like there is conflict of interest here.
If the Kansas Federation of College Republicans wants to start endorsing candidates, that is fine with me. I didn’t go to college in the state of Kansas and am not a part of the organization. I really don’t care who they endorse. The problem with such an organization endorsing a candidate; however, is that they shouldn’t then expect the other candidate to come to events that they organize. If the College Republicans really wanted to have a fair and honest series of debates, it surely would have been in their best interests to withhold their endorsement until after the debate series.
Because of this, how can we blame Mr. Moran for not wanted to attend a debate that is sponsored by an organization that wants his opponent to win? How can the debate possibly be fair and unbiased if its organizers publicly say they are in favor of one candidate.
Furthermore, I believe that Mr. Tiahrt should refrain from criticizing Mr. Moran for turning down the chance to appear at an event that was organized by a group that recently endorsed Mr. Tiahrt. Mr. Moran should have the right to a fair and unbiased debate, and we should afford him the opportunity to turn down debates that will ostensibly be unfair. Mr. Tiahrt disingenuously attacks Mr. Moran for not agreeing to the debate, because the whole idea of this debate is flawed from the outset. By painting the issue in broad strokes about debates and geography, Mr. Tiahrt missed the more important issue that this debate couldn’t possibly be fair.
It’s just another reason why I don’t trust Mr. Tiahrt to be honest.
Endorselessly yours,
Publius
Monday, April 19, 2010
What’s the Truth About Taxes?
Last week Mr. Tiahrt sent out a letter to his supporters that said, “I have never voted for a tax increase. Never, not a single time. And you have my word that I will continue to oppose tax increases and support tax cuts in the U.S. Senate.” He continued to criticize his opponent (Rep. Jerry Moran) for continuously voting to increase taxes and for failing to vote for the Bush tax cuts.
On a policy note, this letter makes me wonder what Mr. Tiahrt’s plans are for paying for the massive size of our federal government. One of the most troubling issues that America faces today is the growing national debt, and a budget that is nowhere close to being balanced. If Mr. Tiahrt isn’t willing to raise taxes, what specific government programs does he want to end? Is he willing to end his massive and irresponsible pork projects in an effort to balance the budget?
While the policy implications of Mr. Tiahrt’s letter are certainly questionable, the real problem with this letter is that much of what he writes is completely false. As the Dodge City Globe pointed out, Mr. Tiahrt has actually voted in favor of tax increases as recently as last month (on a measure that Mr. Moran actually voted against). Furthermore, Mr. Tiahrt’s claim that Moran voted against the Bush tax cuts is clearly false. Mr. Moran actually voted FOR the Bush tax cuts.
It’s still relatively early in this campaign, but it has become obvious that there is no lie that Mr. Tiahrt won’t tell in order to get ahead. If Mr. Tiahrt is willing to obviously LIE to his supporters about his and Mr. Moran’s records, what else is he willing to do? If we can’t trust Mr. Tiahrt to be truthful with the people that are already supporting him, how can we trust him to be a truthful representative for all of Kansas?
The truth is that we can’t trust him.
Publius
On a policy note, this letter makes me wonder what Mr. Tiahrt’s plans are for paying for the massive size of our federal government. One of the most troubling issues that America faces today is the growing national debt, and a budget that is nowhere close to being balanced. If Mr. Tiahrt isn’t willing to raise taxes, what specific government programs does he want to end? Is he willing to end his massive and irresponsible pork projects in an effort to balance the budget?
While the policy implications of Mr. Tiahrt’s letter are certainly questionable, the real problem with this letter is that much of what he writes is completely false. As the Dodge City Globe pointed out, Mr. Tiahrt has actually voted in favor of tax increases as recently as last month (on a measure that Mr. Moran actually voted against). Furthermore, Mr. Tiahrt’s claim that Moran voted against the Bush tax cuts is clearly false. Mr. Moran actually voted FOR the Bush tax cuts.
It’s still relatively early in this campaign, but it has become obvious that there is no lie that Mr. Tiahrt won’t tell in order to get ahead. If Mr. Tiahrt is willing to obviously LIE to his supporters about his and Mr. Moran’s records, what else is he willing to do? If we can’t trust Mr. Tiahrt to be truthful with the people that are already supporting him, how can we trust him to be a truthful representative for all of Kansas?
The truth is that we can’t trust him.
Publius
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)