Blumenthal in trouble … you betcha!
No it’s not just the polls. Although the Rasmussen and Q Polls certainly indicate he is. It’s the way the Media and the DSCC are reacting, kinda like stuck pigs. Oink! The first bit of news comes from Jim Geraghty at National Review. It’s been reported that the DSCC, The Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee) has decided to pump a half a million dollars into Blumenthal’s fading campaign, money I assure you they had not counted on spending here. But this afternoon Jim Geraghty reports that after Monday’s debate debacle, more money from the national party is on the way.
After reserving roughly $500,000 in television advertising a couple days ago, the DSCC added yesterday $1.2 million to its ad buy for the remaining three weeks, according to the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake.
Now why would the national party need to spend $2 million dollars on a campaign in a blue state? Maybe Blumy’s debate performance has something to do with that.
Point two: Speaking of squealing, the McMahon campaign points out this article from Paul Bass at the NY Times:
Ms. McMahon has never called for lowering the minimum wage. In fact, she has repeatedly said she does not support lowering it. But the Blumenthal camp made the accusation stick, and many press accounts made it the story of the debate.
The charge stems from Ms. McMahon’s reaction at a news conference last week when she was asked if the minimum wage should be lowered. Here is what she said: “The minimum wage now in our country, I think we’ve set that and a lot of people have benefited from it in our country, but I think we ought to review how much it ought to be, and whether or not we ought to have increases in the minimum wage.”
The next day this (inaccurate) headline appeared in The Day newspaper in New London: “McMahon: Congress should consider lowering minimum wage.”
She never said that, but that did not stop the Democrats from issuing press releases claiming she did.
Today Rick Green of the Courant (bless his heart), uses the NYT catch on the The Day’s false and misleading headline to try and pin the “blame the media” charge on McMahon.
And now, from the Spiro Agnew/John Rowland playbook of convict politicians: there is more evidence of a campaign-in-crisis. This just in from Team McMahon spokesman Ed Patru, who basically blames everything on the New London Day reporter Ted Mann.This is the oldest. most expected and least effective trick in the book. It was McMahon who brought up the entire issue in the first place, raising questions about the minumum wage. I don’t disagree with her, personally, but she entered radioactive territory when she did this.
Two points, Ed doesn’t blame everything on The Day, just the headline, one it manufactured, not Linda, who didn’t bring up the minimum wage but rather, was responding to a question from the media which then used her response to generate a false headline. Everyone follow?
The media’s squealing and the DSCC is panicking and all is right with the world.
NOTE: More evidence? Faced with two polls making the race a dead heat, suddenly October dawns and the media jumps on two polls that are in fact, Democrat leaning. The PPP is a nortoriously unreliable Democrat polling machine and the Merriman poll, that for some strange reason asks us the believe that Democrat voters will race to the polls this year in a percentage reflecting their 2008 registrations (for those of you who believe Dem registrations have held steady) … while undercounting independents, who make up 41% of the electorate, by ten points, in a year when independents are fired up and moving heavy to Linda.
I would say there’s a lot of shaking going on over at Dem central and it’s caught them completely off guard.
Ok Lynn the pessimist has to weigh in! I am always afraid when the Democrats panic! The campaigns disintegrate into constant down and dirty sniping. Then some people get totally fed up and don't vote, usually Republicans. Jim, your blog helps keep the Conservative spirit up, but those without computers and Too much TV fall prey to nasty ad syndrome. Believe me, this is not a prediction, this may be a completely different year and I hope my comments are totally off base. Chris, you are free to tell me I am off base, you usually do.
A few things are certain. More advertising will not change the votes of the D's or R's. It is the I's that will waiver one way or the other. The DSCC money will go to TV attack ads that may give Blumie a dead cat bounce in the polls ahead of the elections. But the negativity will sicken more I's in the general election into voting for McMahon. This could be the best of all worlds as it will energize the R's to vote in greater numbers as well. We shall see.
<!–[if gte mso 9]> Normal 0 <![endif]–>
When Linda McMahon asked Blumenthal the question “How do you create Jobs?” He answered with all of this confusing mumbo-jumbo that didn’t really make sense, and you could tell that he was searching for something to say, so it sounded like total “BS”. After he was finished with all of his incoherent double talk he says, “These are the ideas that I want to bring to Washington.”
No Lynne you are not off base. You know the truth, everyone says they HATE negative ads, but they work!
It would be great to have an entrepreneur as my Senator. An entrepreneur is someone who has new ideas and creates new ways to solve problems.
And let's not forget McMahon "has the best help money can buy"! While Poor Blumie has holes in his shoes!? Of course Blumie is our ticket if the answer to every problem is to litigate or to legislate. Remember him suing the credit reporting agencies when they downgraded the state's credit rating- he's a genius!
Linda is running for senate because she wants to fight for us, the little people of CT!
That is why she spent a million dollars paying lobbyists to kill legislation that would have banned marketing sex and violence to kids and to help her with a Congressional investigation of steroid abuse in her business.
BTW, newest poll has her down by 10., 42% to 52%, Fox News poll.
<!–[if gte mso 9]> Normal 0 <![endif]–>
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh today, and he was talking about someone having issues about their body’s appearance. Then he said, “If anyone should have a problem with there physical appearance it’s that pencil necked geek from Connecticut Blumenthal” I was shocked that Rush would resort to this brand of debasement. I thought it was way out of line. To Rush’s credit he didn’t say anything about the peculiar way Blumenthal slicks down his hair, or the way his ears stick out. However he did say that he personally couldn’t trust anyone that skinny because they probably don’t have enough sense to eat regularly, and again I thought that was way out of line, someone in Rush’s position should be above that sort of thing. At Least Rush had enough class not to mention Blumenthal’s effeminate manner or his creepy demeanor. We should all a bit more sensitive about what we say about others. If Blumenthal is constantly reminded about all of his peculiarities he may begin to develop even more problems about himself than he has already. So from now on let’s be more considerate. Cheep shots are cheep shots because the flaws are so obviously apparent that there’s no need to point them out, especially when it comes to Richard Blumenthal.
VR, Thanks, my first laugh of the day. They are hard to come by campaigning in my district.
High definition television is not Rambo's friend, particularly on a really big screen…